¥ 









7 vP^ 















N.'-. *bV*' '■^M^^\ '-KrA «-^^^S^»-» ■>-_.* 




'^0' 










^"-^t. 










;.' -^^0^ ° 















■^^ . 













^^ 



* -<L» 






LETTERS 



HN QUINCY ADAMS 



HIS CONSTITUENTS 



•WELFTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT 
IN MASSACHUSETTS. 

TO WHICH IS ADDED 

HIS SPEECH IN CONGRESS, 

DELIVERED 

FEBRUARY 9, 1837. 



BOSTON: 

PUBLISHED BY ISAAC KNAPF, 

No. 25 Cornhill. 

1837. 



INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 



The following letters have been published, within a few 
weeks, in the Quincy (Mass.) Patriot. Notwithstanding the 
great importance of the subjects which they discuss, the in- 
tense interest which they are calculated to awaken throughout 
this commonwealth and the whole country, and the exalted 
reputation of their author as a profound statesman and power- 
ful writer, — they are as yet hardly known beyond the limits of 
the constituency to whom they are particularly addressed. 
The reason of this is sufficiently obvious. John Quincy Adams 
belongs to neither of the prominent political parties, fights no 
partisan battles, and cannot be prevailed upon to sacrifice truth 
and principle upon the altar of party expediency and interest. 
Hence neither party is hiterested in defending his course, or in 
giving him an opportunity to defend himself But, however 
systematic may be the efforts of mere partisan presses to sup- 
press, and hold back from the public eye, the powerful and 
triumphant vindication of the Right of Petition, the graphic 
delineation of the Slavery spirit in Congress, and the humbling 
disclosure of northern cowardice and treachery, contained in 
these letters, they are destined to exert a powerful influence 
upon the public mind. They will constitute one of the most 
stiiking pages in the history of our times. They will be read with 
avidity in the North and in the South, and throughout Europe. 
Apra't from the interest excited by the subjects under discus- 
sion, and viewed only as literai-y productions, they may be 
ranked among the highest intellectual efforts of their author. 
'Iheir sr»rcasm is Junius-like — cold, keen, unsparing. In 
boldness, directness, and eloquent appeal, they will bear com- 
parison with O'Connell's celebrated letters to the Reformers 
of Great Britnin. They are the offspring of an intellect un- 



4 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS. 

shorn of its primal strength, aiid combining the ardor of youth 
with the experience of age. 

The disclosure made in these letters, of the Slavery influ- 
ence exerted in Congress over the representatives of the free 
states, — of the manner in which the rights of freemen have 
been bartered for southern votes, or basely yielded to the 
threats of men educated in despotism, and stamped by the 
free indulgence of unrestrained t3'ranny with the " odious 
peculiarities " of Slavery, — is painful and humiliating in the 
extreme. It will be seen, tlsat, in the great struggle for and 
against the Right of Petition, an account of whicli is given in 
the following pages, their author stood, in a great measure, 
alone^ and unsupported by his northern colleagues. On his 
"gray, discrowne<l head" the entire fury of slaveholding arro- 
gance and wrath was expended. He stood alone — beating 
back, with his aged and single arm, the tide which v/ould have 
borne down and overwhelmed a less sturdy and detcrmir.ed 
spirit. 

We need not solicit for these letters, and the speech vvhich 
accompanies them, a thorough perusal. They deserve, and we 
trust will receive, a cii-culation throughout the entire country. 
They will meet a cordial welcome from every lover of humao 
liberty, from every friend of justice and the rights of man,^ 
irrespective of color or condition. The principles which they 
defend, the sentiments which they express, are those of Massa- 
chusetts, as recently asserted, almost unanimously, by her 
legislature. In both branches of that body, during the dis- 
cussion of the subject of slavery and the right of petition, the 
course of the ex-President was warmly and eloquently com- 
mended. Massachusetts wiii sustain her tried and faithful 
representative ; and the time is not iar distant, when the best 
and worthiest citizens of the entire North will proffer him 
their thanks for his noble defence of f/ieir rights SiS freemen, and 
of the rights of the slave as a man. 

J. G. W, 

Boston, May 16, 1837. 



LETTERS. 



House of Representatives U. S. ) 
WAsniNGTOx>f, 3d March, 1837. j 

To the Inhabitants of the Ticelfth Congressional District 
of Massachusetts. 

Fellow-Citizens : — The proceedings of the House of 
Representatives, on the presentation of abolition and anti- 
slavery petitions, on the 23d of January, were so incorrect- 
ly reported in the National Intelligencer of the 25th, that 
I addressed a letter to the editors of that paper, pointing 
out some of its errors and omissions, udiich was published 
in their paper of the 30th. 

On that day, I presented twenty-one petitions, all of 
which were laid on the table without being read, though, 
in every instance, I moved for the reading, which the 
Speaker refused to permit. From his decision I took, in 
every case, an appeal, and the appeal was in every case 
laid on the tabic, by a vote of the House, at the motion of 
a member from New Hampshire, Mr. Cushman. This 
gentleman, having been reported, in the Globe, as having 
voted against receiving the abolition petitions, addressed 
to the editors of that paper a letter correcting that error, 
and stating that he had voted for receiving them, and then 
for laying them on the table, where they might be taken 
up and acted upon whenever the House should think fit. 
Here, you will observe, was the line of separation between 
the northern anti-abolitionists and the southern slavehold- 
ers in the House. The practical result to the petitioner 
1* 



b J. Q. ADAMS S LETTERS. 

was the same. His right of petition was in both cases 
suppressed. The freedom of speech in the House was 
equally denied to the members presenting the petition, to 
support, by argument, its prayer. But the slaveholder 
denied the right of Congress to receive the petition. His 
northern auxiliary receives the petition, and lays it on the 
table, to be taken up when time shall serve, but in the 
meantime refuses to hear it read. The slaveholder would 
strip Congress of the pov/er. The northerner holds it in 
reserve. This distinction may hereafter prove to be a 
difference. Its present issue is the same. 

I considered, as I stated in my address of the 31st of 
January, the system of action of the House upon the abo- 
lition petitions as settled for the remainder of the session. 
But between that and the next day for receiving petitions, 
Monday, the 6th of February, I received thirty petitions, 
among which were two which came to me by the mail, 
postmarked Fredericksburg, Virginia; one of them signed 
]3y nine names of women, in various hand-writing; some 
of them good, none of illiterate appearance. It prayed 
not for the abolition of slavery, but that Congress would 
put a stop to the slave-trade in the District of Columbia. 
It was accompanied by a letter signed by one of the names 
subscribed to the petition, requesting me to present it. 
The other purported to be from twenty-two slaves, sub- 
scribed so as to have every appearance of being genuine ; 
the first name being in a hand-writing not absolutety bad, 
and subscribed also alone to a letter requesting me to pre- 
sent the petition. I believed the petition signed by female 
nam.es to be genuine, and did not believe them to be names 
of free negroes or mulattoes ; but had I known them to be 
such, that would not have deterred me from presenting it ; 
the object of it being not only proper in itself, but lauda- 
ble, and eminently fit for subscription by virtuous women 
of any color or complexion. I had suspicions that the 
other, purporting to be from slaves, came really from the 
hand of a master, who had prevailed on his slaves to sign 
it, that they might have the appearance of imploring the 
members from the North to cease offering petitions for their 



J. Q. ADAMS S LETTERS. 7 

emancipation, which could have no other tendency than 
to aggravate their servitude, and of being so impatient 
under the operation of petitions in their favor, as to pray 
that the northern members who should persist in present- 
ing them should be expelled. Intimations of the same de- 
sire had already been ma^iifested in quarters very remote 
from servitude, and not even professors of servility. They 
had been seen in a newspaper of this city, professedly de- 
voted to the pure coinage of democracy from the mint of 
Van Buren and Rives, against the counterfeit currency 
of Benton and Amos Kendall, The Albany Argus itself, 
a paper known to be under the same influences, had la- 
mented that the Massachusetts madman should be permit- 
ted, week after week, — to do what 1 to persist in presenting 
abolition petitions ! This was the head and front of my 
offending ; and for this alone, the petition from slaves, for 
my expulsion from the House, was but the echo of the 
distinct and explicit call from the Albany Argus and the 
Van Buren and Rives's Washingtonian. 

But the petition, avowedly coming from slaves, though 
praying for my expulsion from the House if I should per- 
severe in presenting abolition petitions, opened to my 
examination and inquiry a new question ; or at least a 
question which had never occurred to me before, and 
which I never should have thought of starting upon spec- 
ulation, namely : whether the right to petition Congress 
could in any case be exercised by slaves? And after giv- 
ing to the subject all the reflection of which I was capa- 
ble, I came to the conclusion, that however doubtful it 
might be whether slaves could petition Congress for any 
thing incompatible with their condition as slaves, and with 
their subjection to servitude, yet that, for all other wants, 
distresses, and grievances, incident to their nature as men, 
and to their relation as members, — degraded members as 
they may be, — of this community, they do enjoy the right 
of petition ; and that, if they enjoy the right in any case 
whatever, there could be none in which they were more 
certainly entitled to it than that of deprecating the at- 
tempts of deluded friends to release them from bondage — 



8 3. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 

a case in which they alone could, in the nature of things, 
speak for themselves, and their masters could not possibly 
speak for them. The next question which I considered 
was, whether this paper was embraced by the resolution 
of the 18th of January ; and of that, no man, understand- 
ing the English language, could entertain a moment's 
doubt. 

But after settling these two questions to the satisfac- 
tion of my own mind, there remained another, with what 
temper they would be received in a House, the large ma- 
jority of which consisted of slaveholders, and of their po- 
litical northern associates, whose mouth-pieces had already 
put forth their feelers to familiarize the freemen of the 
North with the sight of a representative expelled from his 
seat for the single offence of persisting to present abolition 
petitions, I foresaw that the very conception of a petition 
from slaves would dismount all the slaveholding philoso- 
phy of the House, and expected it would produce an ex- 
plosion, which would spend itself in wind. Without there- 
fore presenting, or offering to present, the petition, I stated 
to the Speaker that I had such a paper in my possession, 
which I had been requested to present, and inquired 
whether it came within the resolution of the 18th of Janu- 
ary. Now, the Speaker had decided that, under that order, 
no such paper should be read ; yet his first impulse v/as to 
get possession of that paper ; but I declined presenting it, 
till it should be decided whether it was embraced by the 
resolution of the 18th of January, or not. The Speaker, 
conscious as he was that it came so clearly within the 
letter of the resolution that it was impossible for him to 
decide that it did not, yet horrified at the idea of receiv- 
ing and laying on the table a petition from slaves, said 
that, in a case so novel and extraordinary, he felt himself 
incompetent to decide, and must take the advice and di- 
rection of the House. One of the gross absurdities of the 
resolution, as administered by the Speaker, was, that 
every paper relating to slavery, or the abolition of slavery, 
should, without being read, be laid on the table. I had 
repeatedly remonstrated both against the resolution and 



J. Q. ADAMS's LETTERS. 9 

against his construction of it — in vain ; and one of my 
purposes in putting this question to him v/as to expose 
the absurdity in its uncoverable nakedness. The resolu- 
tion of the 18th of January presupposed by its own terms 
that every paper, relating to slavery or the abolition of 
slavery, should be received, without examination or inqui- 
ry whence it came, or what were its contents. There 
v\^as neither exception nor qualification in the resolution, 
and the Speaker had decided that no such paper should 
be read. If I had stated that I had a petition from sundry 
persons in Fredericksburg, relating to slavery, v^^ithout 
saying that the petitioners were, by their own avowal, 
slaves, the paper must have gone upon the table ; but the 
discovery would soon have been made that it came from 
slaves, and then the tempest of indignation would have 
burst upon me with tenfold fury, and I should have been 
charged with having fraudulently introduced a petition 
from slaves, without letting the House knov/ the condition 
of the petitioners. 

To avoid the responsibility of such a charge, I put the 
question to the Speaker, giving him notice that the peti- 
tion purported to come from slaves, and that I had sus- 
picions that it came from another and a very dilfb-ent 
source. The Speaker, after failing in the attempt to ob- 
tain possession of the paper, referred my question to the 
House for decision ; and then ensued a scene of which I 
propose to give you an account in a subsequent address, 
entreating you only to remember, if what I have said, or 
may say to you hereafter, on this subject, should tax your 
patience, that the stake in question is your right of pe- 
tition, your freedom of thought and of action, and the 
freedom of speech in Congress of your representative. 

JOHN aUINCY ADAMS. 



10 J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 



Washington, 8th March, 1837. 

To the Inhabitants of the Tivdfth Congressional District 
of Massachusetts. 

Fellow-Citizens : — When, on the 6th of February last, 
the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the United 
States transferred to the House the responrsibility of 
answering the question which I had addressed to him, 
whether a petition, which I held in my hand, purporting 
to come from slaves, was or was not embraced by the res- 
olution of the preceding ISth of January, prescribing that 
all such papers should be laid on the tai3le, without being 
printed or referred, and without any further action of the 
House upon them whatever : the most remarkable charac- 
teristic of the debate which followed, was the struggle of 
the slave representation to escape from answering the 
question. They never did answer it. There are in the 
House one hundred representatives of slaves, about eighty 
of whom were present. There was not a man among them 
who did not know, or who dared to deny, that it was in- 
cluded in that resolution; and the first of them who rose, 
Tiir. Haynes, of Georgia, after expressing his astonishment 
and surprise at my audacity, not only then, but on former 
diiys, in presenting abolition petitions, fairly acknowledged 
that he did not know how to answer my question, and 
thought it might be giving too much importance to the 
petition to object to its being received. He then proceed- 
ed in a strain of invective upon me, till I called him to 
order ; upon which he proceeded to announce his inten- 
tion to move that the petition should be rejected, subject 
to the alternative of a permission, that it should be Vv^ith- 
drav/n. But I had not presented the petition. It was not 
in the possession of the House, and therefore could neither 
be rejected, nor by the order of the House withdrawn. 
Besides, the impulse of the slave representation was not to 
answer the question, but to punish, or at least to frighten 
the inquirer. Mr. Haynes was immediately admonished 



J. Q. Adams's letters. 11 

that no slaveholder must offer such a motion, and imme- 
diately withdrew that which he had proposed to make. 
The torrid zone was in commotion. Half-subdued calls 
of Expel him, expel him, were heard from various parts of 
the Hall, and the boldest spirits, without yet venturing 
upon any specific charge, were instigating each other to 
some deed of noble daring, and of instant execution, to 
vindicate the insulted honor of the South. At this mo- 
ment, My. John M. Patton, of Virginia, the representative 
of the District of which Fredericksburg forms a part, one 
of the ablest, m.ost independent, and most rational of the 
slaveholding members, seeing into what absurdities they 
were about to rush, attempted to divert the torrent of their 
wrath into another channel. He said he was for going to 
the fountain-head at once, and asked leave to offer a reso- 
lution, not concerning the petition from slaves, but that 
the petition from nine loomen, of Fredericksburg, which 
had been received and laid on the table, under the order 
of the 18th of January, should be taken off the table and 
returned to the member from Massachusetts who had 
offered it. The rules of the House were forthwith sus- 
pended, to enable him to offer it; and he did offer it. 
The reason that he alleged for his resolution was, that the 
petition came from free negroes, and colored persons of 
bad character. This was ingeniously devised, but did not 
suit the fiery temper of the moment. One member was of 
opinion, that if the gentleman from Massachusetts was to 
receive any countenance from the House, it was time for 
the members from the South to go home. Another 
thought that if any man should disgrace the government 
under which he lived, by presenting a petition from slaves 
praying for emancipation, the petition should, by order of 
the House, be committed to the flames, to which combus- 
tion another member opined, that the man who should 
present the petition should also be consigned. The fur- 
nace was now sufficiently heated, and Mr. Thompson, of 
South Carolina, a gentleman of great politeness and cour- 
tesy, offered as an amendment to the proposftion the fol- 
lowing resolution : 



12 



J. Q. ADAMS S LETTERS. 



"Resolved, Tliat the Honorable John Quincy Adams, bj'lhe allempljust 
made by lihn to introduce a petition, purporting on its face to be from slaves, 
lias been guilty of a gross disrespect to the House, and that he be insUmtlij 
brought to the bar, to receive the severe censure of the Speaker." 

This was the first of a series of resolutions, which ab- 
sorbed three days of the time of the House, but upon 
which I shall not now waste yours. I invite your atten- 
tion to it now, only to request you to mark its character- 
istic tone. Mr. Jefferson has observed that the intercourse 
between master and slave is a perpetual succession of 
boisterous and degrading passions ; and it is in the order 
of nature that the habitual indulgence of this temper of 
overbearing domination insensibly pervades the general 
character of the master, and urges him to assume a tone 
of superiority over his equals, and to hold this lofty bear- 
ing just so far as he finds it tolerated without rebuke. On 
the fioor of the House of Representatives, the members, 
whether representing slaves or mere freemen, are upon a 
footing of perfect equality with each other. Can you be- 
lieve that your representative, on that common floor, for 
asking of the Speaker the simple question, whether a 
petition from slaves came within the resolution of the 
House, which it unquestionably did, became, from that in- 
stant, in the eyes of these master-members, a criminal 
to be punished, and that the only question between 
them was, whether he should be instantly dragged to 
the bar, and severely censured by a master-speaker, or ex- 
pelled from the House, or burnt with his petition at the 
stake ? 

The whole transaction, from beginning to end, was in 
the highest degree disorderly. The resolution offered by 
Mr. Waddy Thompson was itself wholly out of order as 
an amendment to Mr. Patton's resolution, which related 
to a subject altogether different. The Speaker's duty was 
to reject at once Mr. Thompson's resolution as out of or- 
der ; but the Speaker was a master, and he received it. 
Mr. Thompson's resolution was tinkered between him and 
Mr. Haynes, and Mr. Lewis, of Alabama, till it assumed 
the following shape : — 



J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. I'B 

*' Resolved, That John Qiiinc}' Adams, a member from the State of Massa- 
chusetts, b^"^ his attempts to introduce into this House a petition from slaves, 
for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, committed an oulrftgo 
on the rig-hls and feelings of a larg-e portion of the people of this Union; a 
flag-rant contempt of the dignity of this House : and, by extending to slaves 
a privilege only belonging to freemen, directly invites the slave population 
to insurrection ; and that the said member be forlhwitli called to the bar of 
tlie House, to be censured by the Speaker." 

My constituents ! reflect npon the purport of this reso- 
lution, which was immediately accepted by Mr. Thomp- 
son, as a modification of his own, and as unhesitatingly 
received by the Speaker. He well knew that I had made 
no attempt to introduce in the House a petition from 
slaves, and if I had, he knew that I should have done no 
more than exercise my right as a member of the House, 
and that the utmost extent of the power of the House 
would have been to refuse to receive the petition. The 
Speaker's duty was to reject instantaneously this resolu- 
tion, and to tell Mr. Lewis and Mr. Thompson, that the 
first of his obligations was, to protect the rights of speech 
of members of that House, v/hich I had not in the slight- 
est degree infringed. But the Speaker was a mastrr. 

Observe, too, that, in this resolution, tlie notable discov- 
ery was first made, that I had directly invited the slaves to 
insurrection, of vvhich bright thought Mr. Thompson af- 
terwards availed himself, to threaten me with the grand 
jury of the District and the penitentiary, as an incendiary 
and a felon. I pray you to remember this, not on my ac- 
count, or from the suspicion that I could, or shall ever, he 
moved from my purpose by such menaces, but to give yon 
the measure of slaveholding freedom — of speech, of tlie 
press, of action, of thought ! If such a question as I asked 
of the Speaker is a direct invitation of the slaves to insur- 
rection, forfeiting all my rights as a representative of tlie 
people, subjecting me to indictment l)y a grand jury, to 
conviction by a petit jury, and to an infamous penitentiary 
cell — I ask you not what freedom of speech is left to your 
representative in Congress, but what freedom of spec:'.!, 
of the press, and of thought, is left to you? 

A slaveholdin-T President of the United States has ur- 



14 J. Q. ADAMS^'s LETTERS. 

gently recommended to Congress the enactment of a law 
to prohibit, tmdcr severe penalties, " the circulation in the 
Southern States, through the mail, of incendiary publica- 
tions, intended to instigate the slaves to insurrection.'^ 
That law the Congress of the United States have hitherto 
had too much self-respect to pass. But if it had, this reso- 
hition, the fruit of the combined wisdom of slave repre- 
sentation from South Carolina and Alabama, furnishes for 
your use an ample commentary to expound what fhei/ 
understand and mean by incendiary publications intended 
to instigate the slaves to insurrection ; and what they of 
course would have excluded by severe penalties from cir- 
culation by the mail. 

Mr. Patton, whose seat v.' as next to mine, and at the 
same table, had got a hint, perhaps from me, or from hear- 
ing my ansv/er to some inquirer at my seat, that the peti- 
tion was 7iot for the abolition of slavery, and he knew that 
I had not attempted to offer it ; he therefore cautioned the 
movers of the resolutions, that their proceedings were 
rather harsh, and somewhat over-hasty in their assumption 
of facts. This gave me the first opportunity of interposing 
a word of self-defence — for which I refer you to my next 
address, 

JOHN aUINCY ADAMS. 



Washington, 13th March, 1837. 

To the Inhabitants of the Ticclfth Congressional District 
of Massachusetts. 

Fellow-Citizens : — When the cooling potion adminis- 
tered, by Mr. Patton, to the burning thirst for my punish- 
ment, of the members from Alabama and South Carolina, 
began to take effect, I rose and inquired of the Speaker 
how it happened that a direct resolution calling for in- 
stantaneous censure upon me, had been substituted for the 
resolution offered by Mr. Patton, and which he had ob- 
tained, by a vote of two tliirds of the House, the suspen- 



J. Q. ADA'vIs's LETTERS. 15 

^-'on of the rules to eniil'le him lo offer — which resola- 
iioii was that the petitioix fiom thj :iine women of Freder- 
icksbursf, which Iiad !>( a laid on the table under the 
order of the 18th of Jo ^ary, shoiid be taken and re- 
turned to me. The Spn ker said that it was by the well- 
known parliamentary rale that a question of privilege 
supersedes all other subjects of debate, and takes prece- 
dence of all others. I told him I was satisfied, for I knew 
it would be in vain to rcnonstrate. But the Speaker well 
knew there was no groni. : for a question of privilege, and 
it was his duty to arrest the resolution of censure at its 
first presentation. But i.' there had been such ground, the 
resolution of censure cc ild not be offered as an amend- 
ment to a resolution which involved no question of privi- 
lege. Mr. Patton's reso ution respecting the petition of 
the nine women, was no question of privilege. When Mr. 
Thompson offered, as an ;--:-nendment to it, the resolution 
of direct censure upon me, the Speaker's duty was to 
reject it as not in order, and he would have saved three 
days of very useless debate. The Speaker, whether from 
incompetency or unwillingness to discriminate between 
the questions of privilege and the unprivileged questions 
in this case, continued to confound them together through- 
out the whole of these dircussions, and contributed thereby 
to render the whole deb *te as ridiculous as it was disor- 
derly. The v/hole proceeding hitherto had been such a 
scene of blind precipitancy and fury, that I had not had a 
moment of time to interpose and stay the v/hirlwind. I 
had compassion upon Messrs. Thompson and Lewis, and 
told them, that, if they intended to bring me to the bar, to 
receive the censure of the Speaker, they m.ust amend their 
resolution, and then intimated to them, that their specifi- 
cation of my crime rau^it be, that I had in my possession a 
petition from slaves, praying for that which they them- 
selves most ardently desired — namely, my expulsion from 
the House, if I should p':^rsist in presenting abolition peti- 
tions. The fact was so — but the ludicrous position into 
which they had floundered was that of calling down cen- 
sure upon a member of the House for they knew not what 



16 J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 

— for phantoms of their own imagination — for the contents 
of a petition which they had not suffered to be read, and 
which no one but myself knew. 

You will readily conceive that this explanation was not 
altogether satisfactory to those whose passions had so far 
outstripped their reason. Mr. Mann, a somewhat distin- 
guished member from the state of New York, supplied 
them with cold comfort, by a long discourse against abo- 
lition and fanatics — entreating the gentlemen from the 
Soidh not to make themselves uneasy about their slaves, 
nor to take too much to heart my exceedingly improper 
conduct in presenting, week after week, these abolition 
petitions ; but to consider that 1 was a venerable, super- 
annuated person, who in my better days would not have 
done so ; and that now some mischievous persons had 
been trifling with me, and I had been trifling with the 
House. 

But the gentlemen from the South were not to be so 
appeased. They very justly thought that this was no 
joking matter. Mr. Thompson, of South Carolina, now 
thought m^y conduct worse than he had thought before — 
and instead of one resolution, he was now prepared to 
ofier three. 

1 . " That the Hon. John Quincy Adams, by an effort to present a petition 
from slaves, has committed a great contempt of this House. 

2. " That the member from Massaciiusetts above named, by creating 
the impression, and leaving the House under that impression, that the said 
petition was for the abolition of slavery, when he knew that it Avas not, has 
trifled with the House. 

3. " That the Hon. John Quincy Adams receive the censure of the House 
for his conduct refen-ed to in the preceding resolutions." 

Here you see, instead of one crime, I had committed 
two — first, by an effort to present a petition from slaves, 
which was a great contempt of the House ; secondly, by 
creating an impression, and leaving the House under it, 
that the petition was for the abolition of slavery, when 1 
knew it was not — this was trifling with the House, and for 
these crimes I was to be censured. An effort to present a 
j^etition, a great contempt of the House ! Creating an 
impression, and leaving the House under that impression, 



J. Q. ADAMSES LETTERS. 17 

trifling with the House 1 In the annals of parliamentary 
deliberation, were such offences ever heard of before? 
Where, but in an assemblage of slave drivers and slaves, 
Vv'ould you have believed that such resolutions could be 
offered, and entertained, and discussed, hour after hour? 
Yet there they stand, recorded on the Journals of the 
House of Representatives of the United States. They 
consumed all the remnant of the day. The gentlemen 
from the South had all the argument to themselves, and 
went on creating impressions and leaving the House under 
them, till,' as evening tv/ilight came on, Mr. Cambreleng 
told them that he was himself a native of a Southern 
State, and held the abolitionists in proper abomination ; 
that he did at first intend to vote v/ith them for censuring 
me, till he discovered that the petition was not for the 
abolition of slavery, but the reverse. It v/as evidently a 
hoax, played upon me hy a southern man ; and there 
might be members in the House who knew something 
about it. That I, to be sure, had been very troublesorae 
by presenting so many abolition petitions; but I had made 
atonement for that by declaring my opinion against the 
abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, and more 
than five years since he had heard me say that the ren^.edy 
was worse than the disease. The gentlemen from the 
South were exasperated by these cool and cutting sarcasms, 
gravely delivered by the Chairman of the Committee of 
Ways and Means, till he was called upon for personal 
explanations. Some of them were for transferring the 
resolutions of censure for trifling with the House, from me 
to him ; and some for joining him with me as an accom- 
plice in the offence. In this temper the House adjourned ; 
not a word having been said by me, or by any one in my 
behalf, since the new batch of censorial resolutions had 
been brought forth. Towards the close of the day, Mr. 
Haynes, the gentleman who at first did not know whether 
it would not be giving too much importance to a petition 
from slaves to object to receiving it, moved as an amend- 
ment to the three resolutions of Mr. Thompson, tiie fol- 
lowing : — . 



18 J. Q. Adams's letters. 

'' RpsoJrrd, That John Quincy Adams a representative from the state 
of Massachusetts, has rendered liimself jc 'y Hable to the severest censure 
of this House, and is censured accordingi;, , for having attempted to present 
to the House the petition of slaves."' 

And this resolution came on the next morning, immedi- 
ately after the reading of the Journal, and its correction, 
which was amended at my motion. 

The question before the House was thus much simpli- 
fied, and my crime now consisted only in attempting to 
present to the House a petition from slaves. But Mr. 
Jenifer, a very spirited slaveholding gentleman from 
Maryland, who had taken the floor at the close of the 
session of the day before, now announced that he wanted 
more specific information, before he should vote upon this 
resolution, and, in somethiiig of an overseer's tone, called 
upon me explicitly to declare whether a statement in the 
Globe of that morning, of what I had said the day before, 
was or was not correct — or whether I had attempted to 
present a petition from slaves. I answered his inquiry 
without delay ; by stating that I had made no such attempt; 
that the report in the Globe was correct ; that I had 
merely told the Speaker that I had a paper purporting to 
be a petition from slaves, which I was requested to pre- 
sent ; that I had inquired of the Speaker whether it 
came within the resolution of the 18th of January, to 
which question I was yet waiting for an answer, and, if 
that answer should be that it did, I should present the 
petition. For the gentleman from Marylanil must under- 
stand, that if slaves were laboring under grievances and 
afflictions not incident to their condition as slaves, but to 
their nature as human beings, born to trouble, as the 
sparks fly upward, and it were within the power and com- 
petency of the House to afibrd them relief, and they shoidd 
petition for it — if the House would permit me, I most 
assuredly would present their petition, and if that avowal 
deserved the censure of the House, I was ready to receive 
it — for petition was prayer — it v,;i.s the cry of the suffering 
for relief; of the oppressed for rnercy. It was what God 
did not disdain to receive from man, whom he had created ; 



J. Q. ADAMSES LETTERS. 19 

and to listen to prayer — to hearlcen to the groan of wretch- 
edness — was not merely a duty ; it was a privilege ; it was 
enjoyment ; it was the exercise of a godlike attribute, in- 
dulged to the kindly sympathies of man. I would there- 
fore not deny the right of petition to slaves — I would not 
deny it to a horse or a dog, if they could articulate their 
sufferings, and I could relieve them. If slaves should pe- 
tition for any thing improper, unreasonable, or which ought 
not to be granted, I might pause, or refuse to present their 
petition ; but if the object prayed for was just and reason- 
able in itself, and I had the power to grant it, I would — 
unless forbidden by the House — I would present it ; 

" For earthly power doth then show likest God's, 
When mercy seasons justice.^' 

From this time, Mr. Jenifer was ready to pass any censure 
upon me without hesitation. He was sure I was the only 
man in the House who believed that slaves could, in any 
case whatever, have the right to petition, and he gave me 
up as a reprobate spirit, worthy of any punishment that 
could be inflicted upon me — only regretting that I had not 
presented the petition, that he might have the opportunity 
to vote for my expulsion from the House. 

Still, it was obvious, on the state of facts, that I had not 
aWimpted to present to the House a petition from slaves. 
The resolution of Mr. Haynes, therefore, could not be 
made to suit the mastn^ appetite of revenge, till at last 
Mr. Dromgoole, of Virginia, bethought himself of suggest- 
ing to Mr. Waddy Thompson, as a substitute for his three 
resolutions, the following : — 

" Resolved, That the Hon. John Quincy Adams, a member of the House, 
by stating^ in his place that he had in his possession a paper, purporting- to 
be a petition from slaves, and inquiring- if" it was within the meaning- of a 
resolution heretofore adopted, (as preliminary to its presentation,) has ^ven 
color to the idea that slaves have the right to petition, and of his readiness to 
be their org-an 3 and that, for the same, he deserves the censure of this 
House. 

" Resolved, That the aforesaid John Quincy Adams receive a censure 
from the Speaker, in the presence of the House of Representatives." 

Here I must do Mr. Dromgoole the justice to admit, 
that the facts were for the first time stated with correctness 



20 J. Q. ADAMS's LETTERS. 

and precision. I had given color to the idea, that the right 
of petition is confined to no color, and of my readiness to 
be the organ of slaves petitioning for redress of grievances 
which they only could suffer, and of which no voice but 
their own could complain. This was my offence, and this 
I had the more readily avowed, at the requisition of Mr. 
Jenifer, because, in the peremptory bluster of his manner, 
I had perceived the disposition to alarm me out of the 
admission, as, in the taunting confidence of his reply, that 
I was the only man in the House who entertained that 
opinion, I saw at once the exultation of his reliance upon 
numbers to put me down, and the disappointment of his 
failure in the attempt to intimidate me into a recantation 
or apology. And so satisfactory to the master-spirit of the 
South were the resolutions of Mr. Dromgoole, that Mr. 
Waddy Thompson accepted them as a modification of his 
own ; and Mr. Haynes, with a viev/ to speedy action, with- 
drew his proposed amendment, and left them in the pos- 
session of the field. 

And thus my crime of giving color to an idea, was 
bandied about among tlie gentlemen from the South, till 
two of the slave representation themselves, men of intelli- 
gent minds and of intrepid spirits, fairly revolting at the 
senseless injustice of all these resolutions of censure upon 
me, dared to come out and declare their resistance to any 
resolution of censure upon me, for what I had done. — 
The first of these was Mr. Robertson, of Virginia, who 
thought, indeed, my course in persisting to present abolition 
petitions very offensive; and my avowal that I did believe 
slaves to possess in any case a right to petition, an aggrava- 
tion of all my preceding offences — but who could not con- 
sent to join ill trampling under foot the freedom of speech of 
the members of the House. Mr. Robertson was also the 
first who assigned a reason for denying to slaves the right of 
petition, which was, that Congress, having no right to inter- 
fere in the law of slavery at all, could not grant the prayer 
of any petition from slaves. This was begging the ques- 
tion ; but it was argument, and not frenzy. From this time, 
all hope of carrying a vote of direct censure upon me was 



J. Q. ADAMS'S LETTERS. 



21 



forlorn. Mr. Thompson complained of the instability of 
his brother slaveholders in the House, but yesterday so 
fiercely bent upon punishment, that they had spurred him 
on, and thought his resolutions not severe enough, now 
dropping off one by one, and flinching even from a vote 
of disapprobation against me. He, hov>^ever, was not to be 
found so pliable. He v/ould adhere inflexibly to his reso- 
lutions, though he should be left to vote for them alone, 
and would comfort himself with the reflection that the 
smaller the number who should support him, the greater 
the honor. 

This was the last flickering of the flame vvhich had burnt 
so intensely for nearly two days. Mr. Robertson's speech 
had broken the spell of slaveholding unanimity into which 
they had been constantly spiriting and lashing one another 
against me, and against the abolitionists, and against the 
North. To cover their retreat, Mr. Bynum, of North 
Carolina, one of the warmest champions of the South, 
after a long and bitter speech, moved, as a substitute for 
Mr. Waddy Thompson's third modification of his resolu- 
tions, the following : — 

*' Resolved, That any attempt to present any petition or memorial, from 
any slave or slaves, negro or free negroes, from any part of the Union, is a 
contempt of the House, calculated to embroil it in strife and confusion, 
incompatible with the dignity of the bodj' ; and any member guilty of the 
same justly subjects himself to the censure of the House. 

" Resohed, further, That a commiitee be appointed to inquire into the fact 
whether any such attempt has been made by any member of the House, and 
report the same as soon as practicable." 

The whole doctrine of contempts, as borrowed from the 
practice of the British Parliament, is a law of tyranny, in 
which the House is at once accuser, party, judge, and 
executioner. Mr. Bynum's resolutions improve upon this 
system, by adding to these complicated attributes of the 
House, that of a retrospective legislator. Mr. Bynum 
dropped all mention of direct censure upon me, but he 
proposed, ex post facto, to declare to be a contempt of the 
House, that which no one before had even dreampt to be 
such. To attempt to present a petition not only from any 
slave, but from any free negro in any part of the Union, 



22 J. Q. ADAMSES LETTERS- 

was, by Mr. Bynum's resolutions, not made a contempt for 
the future, but declared to be so already ; and his second 
resolution proposed the appointment of a committee to 
inquire and report to the House whether such an attempt 
bad been made by any member of the House, 

Now, the Journals of the House bear record of repeated 
instances of petitions from free negroes and people of 
color, received, referred to committees, and reported upon, 
like others, without question of the right of the petitioners. 
The Constitution of the United States prohibits Congress 
from passing any law abridging the right of petition ; and 
here, Mr. Bynum proposes, without law, by a mere resolu- 
tion of the House, to abridge the right of petition, by 
declaring it a contempt of the House to attempt to present 
one — and then he institutes a court of inquiry, with him- 
self at its heady and associates appointed by the master- 
Speaker, to ascertain and report whether such an attempt 
had been made by any member. 

By the propositions of Mr. Bynum, the House, by reso- 
lution, would have made a law constituting a crime ex post 
facto: and then raised a Committee to ascertain and report 
whether any member had broken the law before it \x?,3 
made. 

At this new turn of the debate, Mr. Graves, of Kentucky, 
following the example of Mr. Robertson, declared himself 
explicitly opposed to any resolution of censure upon me. 
He went further, and avowed the opinion that Congress 
\\?ive power to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, 
though well aware that by this avowal he hazarded the 
displeasure of a great part of the slave representation in 
the House, and of many of his own constituents. Mr. 
Graves, like Mr. Robertson, was severe in his animadver- 
sions upon my course as a presenter of abolition petitions ; 
and I should have felt with deep mortification the reproof 
of men so intelligent, fair-minded, and honorable, as I 
know them to be, had I not acted throughout the whole of 
these transactions under an impulse of a higher duty than 
it is in the competency of human approbation to com- 
mand or to reward. They hazarded much in the land of 



J. Q. ADAMSES LETTERS. 23 

slavery, even in showing by their deeds and words that 
they know what freedom is. I honor tliem for their 
spirit ; I thank them for their defence of the freedom of 
sperch in the House of which they were members — a 
defence the more creditable to them, inasmuch as it v/as 
the defence of their adversary against their allies; and I 
rcfrret that, refusing to join in a vote of formal censure upon 
me by the House, they should have thought it necessary to 
express their individual censure upon my exercise of a 
right which they could not deny, and would not refuse. 

Immediately preceding the offer of Mr. Bynum's reso- 
lutions, Governor Lincoln spoke the first word in my 
defence which had been uttered in the House. His speech 
has been well reported, published in several nevvspapers, 
and in a' pamphlet, and has, I presume, been generally 
read by you. On the manner in which he spoke of me, 
it would not become me to remark. Of that in which he 
vindicated your character and honor, his hearers will long 
retain the memory ; nor will it ever be forgotten by me. 

Mr. Phillips represented to the Speaker that Mr. 
Bynum's resolutions, not being within the question of 
privilege, could not be moved as an amendment to the 
resolutions of censure; but the Speaker decided that they 
were in order, and Mr. Phillips had no alternative but to 
submit. 

Mr. Patton tried his hand again. He moved as an 
amendment to Mr. Bynum's amendment of Mr. Waddy 
Thompson's third set of censorial resolutions, all moved 
as amendments to Mr. Patton's resolution that the petition 
from nine women of Fredericksburg should be taken up 
from the table and returned to me, and all decided by the 
Speaker to be perfectly in order. Mr. Patton now moved 
the following : — 

" Resolved, That the right of petition does not belong- to the slaves of tliis 
Union, and that no petition from them can be presentee! to this House, with- 
out derog-atin? from the rights of the slavcholding states, and endangering 
the integrity of the Union. 

" Resolved, That any member who shall hereafter present any such 
petition to the House, ought to be considered as regardless of tiie feelings 
of the House, the rights of the South, and an enemy to the Union. 



24 J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 

" Resolved, That the Hon. John Quiucy Aciams having solemnly disclaimed 
all design of doing- any thing disrespectful to the House, in the inquiry he 
made of the Sjieaker, as to the petition purporting to be from slaves, and 
having; avowed his intention not to offer to present the petition, if the House 
was oV opinion that it ought not io be presented : therefore all further pro- 
ceedings in regard to his conduct now cease." 

These resolutions of Mr. Patton were one step further 
backward behind those of Mr. Bynum. The first of them 
declares that the right of petition does not belong to the 
slaves of this Union, and thus far it approached my ques- 
tion to the Speaker, but did not answer it ; and to the 
negation of the right of the slave, it added a new oifence 
to the criminal code, wh^ch, taken in connection with the 
second resolution, amounted to nothing less than construc- 
tive treason. 

The second resolution endeavors, indeed, to elude the 
prohibition, by the constitution, of the enactment of ex post 
facto laws, by confining to future time the declaratory law 
of treason. Nor does it provide a punishment for this 
atrocious crime. It only says that any member who shall 
hereafter present any such petition to the House ovgld to 
he considered as regardless of the feelings of the House, 
the rights of the South, and an fucmy to the UniGii. 

Now, the Constitution of the United States declares that 
treason against the United States shall consist only in levy- 
ing war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giv- 
ing them aid and comfort : but here is a resolution declar- 
ing that a member of the House ought to be considered as 
an enemy io the Union — for presenting a petition. 

The Constitution of the United States gives to each 
House of Congress the power to determine the rules of its 
proceedings, to punish its members for disorderly behavior, 
and, with the concurrence of two thirds, to expel a mem- 
ber. The power of punishment by the House is limited 
to the offence of disorderly behavior. If this resolution 
had been adopted, and any member should hereafter have 
presented a petition from slaves, what could they have 
done with him? There is not a word or syllable in the 
Constitution or laws of the United States, which prohibits 
slaves from petitioning, or a member of either House of 



J. Q. -ADAMS S LETTERS. '^J 

Congress from presenting their petitions. There is an ex- 
press provision of the Constitution that Congress shall pass 
no law abridging the right of petition ; and here is a reso- 
iution, declaring that a member ought to be considered as 
regardless of the feelings of the House, the rights of the 
South, and an enemy to the Union, fur presenting a peti- 
tion. 

Pcegardless of the feelings of the House ! What have 
the feelings of the House to do with the free agency of a 
member in the discharge of his duty] One of the most 
s?xred duties of a member is to present tlie petitions com- 
mitted to his charge — a duty which he cannot refuse or 
neglect to perform, without violating his oath to support 
the Constitution of the United States, He is not, indeed, 
bound to present all petitions. If the language of the 
petition be disrespectful to the House, or to any of its 
members — if the prayer of the petition be unjust, immoral, 
or unlav/ful — if it be accompanied by any manifestation of 
intended violence or disorder on the part of the petitioners, 
the duty of the member to present it ceases ; not from 
respect for the feelings of the House, but because these 
things themselves strike at the freedom of speech and ac- 
tion, as well of the House as of its members. Neither of 
these can be in the slightest degree affected by the mere 
circumstance of the condition of the petitioner, nor is 
tliere a shadow of reason why the feelings of the House 
should be outraged, by the presentation of a petition from 
slaves, any more than by petitions from soldiers in the army, 
from seamen in the navy, or from the working-women 
of a manufactory. 

Regardless of the rights of the South 1 What are the 
rights of the South'? What is the South ? As a compo- 
nent portion of this Union, the population of the South 
consists of masters, of slaves, and of free persons, white 
and colored, without slaves. Of which of these classes 
would the rights be disregarded by the presentation of a 
petition from slaves? Surely not those of the slaves 
themselves; the suffering, the laborious, the producing 
class. Oh, no ! there would be no disregard of their rights 



26 J. Q, 'Adams's letters. 

in the presentation of a petition from them. The very 
essence of the crime consists in an alleged undue reo-ard 
for their rights; in not denying them the rights of human 
nature ; in not classing them with horses, and dogs, and 
cats. Neither could the rights of the free people, without 
slaves, whether white, black, or colored, be disregarded by 
the presentation of a petition from slaves. Their rights 
could not be aiTected by it at all. The rights of the South, 
then, here mean the rights of the masters of slaves, which, to 
describe them by an inoffensive word, I will call the rights 
of masteri/. These, by the Constitution of the United States, 
are recognized, not directly, but by implication; and pro- 
tection is stipulated for them, by that instrument, to a cer- 
tain extent. But they are rights incompatible with the in- 
alienable rights of all mankind, as set forth in the Declara- 
tion of Independence ; incompatible with the fundamental 
principles of the constitutions of all the free states of the 
Union, and therefore, when provided for in the Constitution 
of the United States, are indicated by expressions which 
must receive the narrowest and most restricted construc- 
tion, and never be enlarged by implication. There is, I 
repeat, not one word, not one syllable in the Constitution 
of the United States, which interdicts to Congress the re- 
ception of petitions from slaves ; and as there is express 
interdiction to Congress to abridge, by law, the right of 
petition, that right, upon every principle of fair construc- 
tion, is as much the right of the South as of the North, 
as much the right of the slave as of the master; and the 
presentation of a petition from slaves, for a legitimate ob- 
ject, respectful in its language, and in its tone and char- 
acter submissive to the decision w'hich the House may 
pass upon it, far from disregarding the rights of the South, 
is a mark of signal homage to those rights. 

An enemy to the Union ! for presenting a petition ! an 
enemy to the Union ! I have shown that the presentation 
of petitions is among the most imperious duties of a mem- 
ber of Congress. I trust I have shown that the ri^rht to 
petition, guarantied to the people of the United States, 
without exception of slaves, express or implied, cannot be 



J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 27 

ahriflged by any act of both Houses, with the approbation 
of the President of the United States ; but this resolution, 
by the act of one branch of the legislature, would effect 
an enormous abridgment of the right of petition, not only 
by denying it to one full sixth part of the whole people, 
but by declaring an enemy to the Union any member of 
the House who should present such a petition. 

The third resolution, as if repenting of the concession 
that the presentation of petitions from slaves was not yet 
the heinous crime, which, according to the second, it was 
to be considered hereafter, graciously tendered to me a 
cessation of prosecution, for what was no offence, in con- 
sideration of my disclaimer of any intention to trifie with 
the House, and my promise not to present the petition if 
the House should refuse to receive it. 

Yet these were the resolutions of a gentleman, who, 
u])on every question disconnected with the color of the 
skin, is just, and fair, and intelligent, and inflexibly devot- 
ed to the principles of freedom. 

These resolutions did not answer my question, but the 
first of them distinctly affirmed that the right of petition 
does not belong to the slaves of this Union. Mr. Patton 
assigned no reason for this averment, nor is there any thing 
in the Constitution or laws to sustain it. In the debate 
which ensued, and which consumed the remainder of the 
day, Mr. Gushing, in a very eloquent speech, proved it to 
be utterly untenable, and that the right of petition was a 
primitive, inalienable right, recognized by the Constitution 
of the United States as preexisting to itself, and guarded 
from abridgment, in express terms, by one of its articles. 

At this stage of the proceedings of the House, the day 
for opening and counting the votes, and declaring the re- 
sult of the presidential election for the term of four years, 
then about to commence, intervened. The question for 
that dav was suspended, and resumed on Thursday, the 
9th of February, by an elaborate speech from Mr. French, 
of Kentucky. This gentleman is a judge, and made the 
only argument against the right of slaves to petition, which 
was delivered in the whole of this three days' debate. 



28 J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 

And what think you was the main stay of his argument 
It was, that if slavery should be abolished in the slave- 
holding states, they would lose a part of their representa- 
tion in Congress. 

Mr. Milligan, the member from Delaware, moved to 
lay the whole subject on the table, but, upon my earnest 
remonstrance against this course, withdrew tlie motion. 

Mr. Evans, of Maine, took the floor, and after review- 
ing and covering with ridicule the whole series of resolu- 
tions of censure upon me, was proceeding to a full defence 
and vindication of the abolition petitions, and of the char- 
acter of the petitioners, when he v/as arrested by calls 
to order. The slave representation in the House could 
not endure, and would not tolerate, the discussion of the 
question whether slavery is a blessing to be perpetuated, 
or an evil to be removed. Mr. Evans was not permitted 
to proceed but upon restrictions and conditions to which 
he would not submit, and he yielded the floor to the 7iias- 
tcry impartiality of the Speaker. 

Mr. Patton presented a new modification of his resolu- 
tions, omitting the first, and reducing the second to the 
following terms : — 

" Resolved, That any member who shall hereafter present to the House any 
petition from the slaves of this Union, ought to be considered as regardless 
of ihe (celings of the House, the right of the Southern States, and unfriendly 
to tlie Union." 

The third resolution was left as it had been oflered on 
Tuesday. 

This was the ultimatum, after three days of debate, 
nine tenths of which, at least, were occupied by the slave 
representation in adjusting the form in which they were 
to settle the principles of this controversy ; this was the 
ultimatum of the law which they were now to dictate, and 
of the new offence by which they were to circumscribe 
the freedom of speech of the members of the House from 
the free portion of this Union, with reference to petitions 
from slaves. 

The averment that the right of petition does not belong 
to the slaves of this Union was withdrawn, and the reso- 



J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. ~ 29^ 

lution, denouncing as a crime the presentation hereafter 
of any petition from the shives of this Union was so far 
mitigated as to make it not quite treason. The member 
who shouhi dare to present such a petition, was still to 
be considered as regardless of the feelings of the House — 
not indeed of the rights of the South, but of the right of 
the Southern States — and although not absolutely an ene- 
my, yet luifricndly to the Union. 

This, I say, was the ultimatum of the slave representa- 
tion. Mr. Waddy Tliompson accepted ?>Ir. Patton's two 
resolutions, now presented, as a modification of all his 
preceding modifications. Mr. Bynum w^ithdrew his pro- 
posed amendment, and Mr. Vanderpool, of New York, 
called for the previous question. 

I had not yet been heard in my own defence. I claimed 
that privilege, and entreated Mr. Vanderpool to withdraw 
his motion, which he declined. The House, however, by 
a vote of 100 to 79, refused to second him^ and I had per- 
mission to speak. 

The substance of what I said has been published in the 
National Intelligencer, and more fully in the Boston Daily 
Advocate. It has also been republished in one of the 
nev/spapers within your district. 

The previous question was then renewed, and after 
some explanations from Mr. Thompson, of South Caro- 
lina, separate questions were taken, by yeas and nays, 
upon each of Mr. Patton's resolutions ; the first of 
which was rejected by a vote of 105 to 92 ; the second 
by a vote of 137 to 21 ; thirty-nine members, who had 
voted upon the first resolution, not voting at all upon the 
second. 

The first was the only question of any importance v»ith 
regard to the settlement of principles. Had it passed, it 
would have put an end to all freedom of speech and action 
in the House, for its object was not to declare that slaves 
have not the right of petition, but to make it an offence 
against the House, the Southern States, and the Union, 
io present n petition. The resolution applied, not to the 
3* 



30 J. Q. ADAMS's LETTERS. 

right of the slave to petition, but to the right of tlie mem- 
ber to present the petition of slaves. 

The vote upon this resolution drew the line of demarca- 
tion between the free and the slave representation more 
closely than perhaps any other vote ever taken in the 
House. Of the ninety-two members, who voted for the 
resolution, thirteen only were from the non-slaveholding 
states ; and in the following proportions — six from New 
York, two from I^Iaine, one from New Hampshire, one 
from Connecticut", two from Ohio, and one from Indiana, 
all politically devoted to the President elect. Of the slave- 
holding states, four members only voted against the reso- 
lution — the member from Delaware, almost a free state, 
two from Kentucky, and one from Missouri. 

Fellow citizens: — Had the transactions of which I have 
given you this tedious detail, been merely conflicts of per- 
sonal concernment to me — had they been merely desperate 
assaults upon my good name and character, for the pur- 
pose of destroying or undermining your confidence in me 
as your representative — I should have felt myself justified 
in asking your patient indulgence to the narrative, in justi- 
fication of myself and of my conduct in your service. But 
higher motives have impelled me to this appeal to yourselves. 

Since the existence of the Constitution of the United 
States, there has never before been an example of an at- 
tempt in the House of Representatives to punish one of 
its members for words spoken by him in the performance 
of his duty. The utmost constitutional power of the 
House would be to regard such words as disorderly, and 
to reprove the speaker of them by declaring them such. 
It is expressly provided by the Constitution, that for any 
speech or debate in either House of Congress, no senator 
or representative shall be questioned in any other place; 
but in this case, your representative was seriously, de- 
liberately, and persistingly threatened with a prosecution, 
by a slaveholding grand jury, and a sentence to the peni- 
tentiary as an incendiary, for asking a question of the 
Speaker of the House. I will not recur to the history of 



J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 31 

the country from which we derive our descent, and es- 
pecially our principles of freedom of speech and action in 
legislative assemblies, for examples, in which motions for 
total revolutions in the government, for subversion of the 
established religion, for setting aside and altering the suc- 
cession to the crown, have been invariably held to be* 
within the general freedom of speech and action to which 
every member of parliament is entitled. If J had offered 
in the House a resolution proposing an amendment to the 
Constitution of the United States, emancipating all the 
slaves in the Union, and declaring slavery, within its bor- 
ders, forever abolished, I should have done nothing beyond 
the exercise of my rights ; but let it once be settled and 
admitted that the House can, by resolution, put a member 
to the bar for offering to present a petition from slaves, 
and what is there to prevent the extension of the same 
interdict to any other subject than slavery ? Mr. Bynum's 
resolutions actually proposed to extend it to petitions from 
free negroes. Had Mr. Patton's resolutions been adopted 
— had the House once assumed a censorial power over its 
members for acts performed in the discharge of their duty 
— I have no doubts that at the very next session of Con- 
gress, the same prescriptive censure would have been ap- 
plied to all petitions for the abolition of slavery in the 
District of Columbia, and from thence to every other pe- 
tition, the prayer of which would be displeasing to a party 
majority in the House, till the right of petition itself, the 
rod of Aaron in the Ark of your Constitution, would 
wither into a mere instrument of oppression and revenge, 
wielded by the hand of faction. 

The decision of the House upon the two resolutions last 
offered by Mr. Patton, proved that a majority of the House 
were not yet prepared to assume this censorial power over 
its members ; but the proceedings of the House on the 
subject of this petition, and all petitions relating to slave- 
ry, did not terminate here. I must ask your further atten- 
tion and patience for the conclusion of my story, v.diich 
may conduct you to the close of the session, and possibly 



3^ 



J. Q. ADAMS S LETTERS, 



to the inaugural address of the new President of the 
United States. 

JOHN aUINCY ADAMS. 



Washington, 20th March, 1837, 

To tlie Inhahitants of the Tioelfth Congressional District 
of Blassachusetts. 

Fellow Citizens : — In my preceding addressee, I have 
spread before you the fifteen successive resokitions, the 
result of the whole combined slave statesmanship of the 
House of Representatives of the United States, all having 
one and the same purpose of passing a vote of censure 
upon me, for asking, in the discharge of my duty as a 
member, a question of the Speaker. 

The two resolutions upon which they had finally forced 
a vote of the House, by yeas and nays, were rejected, but 
my question was not answered, and they were aware that 
it could not be answered, negatively. It had not been, 
whether the House would receive a petition from slaves, but 
whether a petition from slaves came within the resolution 
of the 18th of January, When the resolution declaring 
that 1 had trifled with the House was under consideration, 
one of the most prominent allegations laid to my charge 
was, that, by asking the question, I had intended indirectly 
to cast ridicule upon that resolution, and upon the House 
for adopting it. Nor was this entirely without foundation. 
I did not intend to cast ridicule upon the House, but to 
expose the absurdity of that resolution, against which I 
had protested as unconstitutional and unjust. But the 
characteristic peculiarity of this charge against me was, 
that while some of the gentlemen of the South were urg- 
ing the House to pass a vote of censure upon me, for a 
distant and conjectural inference of my intention to deride 
that resolution, orhers of them, in the same debate, and 
on the same day, were showering upon the same resolution 



J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 33 

direct expressions of iiiiqiialified contempt, without even 
being called to order. Like the saints in Hudibras — 

'' The saints may do the same thing- by 
The Spirit in sincerity, 
Which other men are prompted to, 
And at tlie devil's instance do 3 
And yet the actions be contrary, 
Just as the saints and wicked vary." 

So it was with the gentlemen of the South. While Mr. 
Pickens could openly call the resolution of the 18th of 
January a miserable and contemptible resolution; wliile 
Mr. Thompson could say it was fit only to be burnt by the 
hands of the hangman, without rebuke or reproof, — I was 
to be censured by the House for casting ridicule upon 
them, by asking the question whether the resolution in- 
cluded petitions from slaves. 

They were dissatisfied with the result of their crusade 
against me, in the vindictive pursuit of v^diich they had not 
only forgotten to answer my question, but even to obtain 
from the House a declaration denying the right of slaves 
to petition. On Friday morning, several of th.em. vvere 
absent from their seats in the House, and mysterious 
givings out were circulated that a caucus meeting of the 
South had been held, in which grave proposals had been 
made that they should secede in a body and go home. 
This was an old expedient tried before, some years since, 
and not without some effect upon the simple good nature 
of the North. Whether it was really brought i^orv/ard at 
this time, I cannot absolutely say ; but the rumors were, 
that a first and second meeting v/ere held, at which the 
opinions expressed were found so discordant, that it was 
finally concluded to be the wisest course to return to their 
seats in the House, and negotiate with the free representa- 
tion for a reconsideration of one of the rejected resolutions. 
The interposition of the President elect of the United 
States was also said to have been solicited and obtained ; 
and there is authority from his southern adherents for the 
assurance that it was exercised in a manner altogether 
satisfactory to them. The sympathies of the whig mem- 
bers from the free states were likewise invoked, by their 



34 J. Q. Adams's letters. 

opposition associates of the nullification creed, and the 
Pennsylvania delegation, who, to a man, had been found 
inaccessible to the censorial resolutions, were now many 
of them coaxed into a compromise with the dark spirit of 
slavery, so indignantly and justly characterized by the 
governor of that commonwealth. 

The gentlemen from the South had rung all the changes 
of their censorial resolutions exclusively among themselves. 
The peace-offering to their wounded sensibilities was to 
come entirely from representatives of freemen. The mo- 
tion for reconsideration of the first rejected resolution of 
Mr. Patton, was made on Friday evening by Mr. Lane, of 
Indiana, and carried the next morning by the immediate 
application of the previous question. Even before this 
vote of reconsideration, Mr. Taylor, of New York, and 
Mr. Ingersoll, of Philadelphia, had asked leave of the 
House to offer resolutions propitiatory to the anxieties and 
resentments of the gentlemen of the South. The resolu- 
tion presented by Mr. Taylor deserves special attention, as 
it may be considered as indicative of the opinions and 
councils of the present President of the United States ; 
that of Mr. Ingersoll as expressive of the anti-abolition 
sentiments prevailing at this time in the city of Philadel- 
phia, and less intensely throughout the northern part of 
the Union. The first of these resolutions was offered by 
Mr, Taylor, and the second by Mr. Ingersoll, probably in 
concert with Mr. Thompson, of South Carolina, the mover 
of the first resolution of censure upon me, and who finally 
accepted Mr. InjcrLoITs resolution as a substitute for his 
own. 

Both the resolutions underv/ent sundry modifications 
before they were adopted by the House. That of Mr. 
Ingersoll was, in its last mutation, reduced to this 
shape : — 

" An inquiry having" been made by an honorable gentleman from Massa- 
chusettS;, whether a paper which he held in his hand, purporting to be a pe- 
tition from certain slaves, and declaring themselves to be slaves, came within 
the order of the House of the 18th of Januar}', and the said paper not 
having been received by the Speaker, he stated that, in a case so extra- 
ordinary and novel; he would take the advice and counsel of the House. 



J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 35 

" Resolved, That this House cannot receive said petition without disrej^ard- 
ing its own dignity; the rights of a large class of the citizens of the South 
and Vv^est, and tli'e Constitution of the United States." 

You will remark, that while the preamble recites my in- 
quiry of the Speaker, as the reasons for the resolutions, 
yet the resolution itself evades answering my inquiry. My 
question was, whether the petition came within the order 
of the 18th of January. The answer is, that the House 
c:innot i-eceive said petition, &c. It is no answer at all. 
The Speaker had already decided that two petitions pre- 
sented by me, and not received, were included within the 
order of the 18th of January; and therefore the fact that 
the petition from slaves had not been received, afforded no 
reason for excluding it from the operation of the order of 
the IStli of January. I moved as an amendment to P*Ir. 
Ingersoll's resolution, that the order of the 18th of Janu- 
ary should be inserted in it word for word, followed by a 
declaration that the petition from slaves was not within 
the order of the House, and I asked him to accept this as 
a modification of his resolution, which he declined. He 
said he would give his reasons for declining, if I desired ; 
but he gave none. His resolution was carried by the pre- 
vious question; but if you v/ill read his resolution, as it 
would have read with the insertion of the order, you will 
not need to inquire what his reason was. 

The resolution contains the averment of three distinct 
propositions, declaring that the House could not receive 
the petition, without disregarding, 

1. Its own dignity. 

2. The rights of a large class of the citizens of the 
South and West, and, 

3. The Constitution of the United States. 

How the House could disregard its dignity by receiving 
a petition, is beyond m.y comprehension. The only rea- 
son assigned for it, is the condition of the petitioners, be- 
cause they are slaves. The sentiment, in the bosom of 
any free American, that one sixth part of his countrymen 
are, by the accident of their birth, deprived even of the 
natural right of prayer, is degrading enough to human na- 



36 J. Q. ADARIS'S LETTERS. 

ture ; but that because, in one portion of this Union, the 
native American becomes, by descent from African ances- 
try, an outcast of human nature, classed with tho brute 
creation, within the boundaries of the state in which he 
was born, therefore, it is beneath the dignity of the Gen- 
eral Legislative Assembly of a nation, founding its exist- 
ence upon the natural and inalienable rights of man, to 
listen to his prayer, or even to receive his petition, is an 
opinion to which I trust your judgments Vv'ill never assent, 
and a sentiment which your hearts will reject with disgust. 

" The rights of a large class of the citizens of the 
South and AYest," for the prayer of the petition, w'as not 
for, but against the abolition of slavery in the District of 
Columbia. It was the voice of slaves hugging their 
chains, and praying that they might not be broken. It 
was impossible that any action of the House upon that 
petition, wdiether of compliance or of refusal, could in 
any manner impair any riglUs of any citizen of the South 
or of the West. 

Nor was Mr. Ingersoll more fortunate in his third aver- 
ment, that the House could not receive the petition with- 
out disregarding the Constitution of the United States. 
The truth is directly the reverse. It was his resolution 
that disregarded and trampled under foot the Constitution 
of the United States, which expressly forbids Congress 
from abridging, even by law, the right of petition, and 
which, not by the remotest implication, limits that right to 
freemen. This, fellow-citizens, is a point upon which 
every one of you can judge for himself. Let him who is 
not fiimiliarly acquainted w^ith that instrument, read it — 
let him read and search it, for the article, section, or para- 
graph, from which so much as a plausible inference can be 
drawn, forbidding either House of Congress from receiving 
a petition from slaves. He will find abundant evidence 
that the authors of the Constitution considered slavery as 
one of those vessels of dishonor, which, albeit impairing 
the purity of our political institutions, could not even be 
ncaned with decency in a compact formed for securing to 
the people of the Union the blessing of liberty. He will 



J. Q. ADAMS's LETTERS. 37 

find that, in every instance where slaves are alluded to, it 
is always s.s 2)ersons, and not as property; that the words 
slave or slcwcry are not found in the whole document; 
that they are recognized as members of the community, 
possessing rights even in the provisions depriving them of 
their exercise- and enjoyment ; that their right to be rep- 
resented in Congress is admitted, even in the provision 
which curtails it by two fifths, and transfers the remainder 
to their masters ; that their right to the protection of the 
laws, and to the enjoyment of freedom in the free states, 
is admitted even in the provisions that when escaping from 
the states where they are held to service or labor, they 
shall be delivered up to their masters. But you will not 
fmd one word which expressly, no, not one word which, 
by rational construction, liberal or strict, deprives them 
of the right of petition. 

This resolution, therefore, far better suited to the me- 
ridian of Charleston than to that of Pliiladelphia, is a 
worthy companion of the three reported by Mr. H. L. 
Pinckney, at the first session of the last Congress, and the 
second of wdiich was repeated by the order of the 18th of 
January last. Of that order, many of you have manifested 
3'our high disapprobation, by petitioning the House to re- 
scind it But the resolution of Mr. Ingersoll bows the 
knee yet nearer to prostration before the spirit of slavery. 
It surrenders the post at which the tottering freedom of 
the North and Centre had erected a breastwork of defence 
to the right of petition. The gentlemen of the South had 
been desperately struggling through two sessions of Con- 
gress, for a positive refusal of the House to receive any 
petition for the abolition of slavery in the District of Co- 
lumbia, or in any manner relating to slavery. This refu- 
sal to receive, they had not been able to carry, till a repre- 
sentative from the city of William Penn, came forward as 
their volunteer auxiliary. His resolution has set the ex- 
ample of refusing to receive petitions, on no better ground 
than the condition of the petitioners. At the next step in 
the progress of servility, the same argument will be applied 
with more plausibility to the object of the petition, and the 
4 



38 J. Q. ADAIvIs's LETTERS. 

House will be called to resolve a formal exclusion and re- 
fusal to receive any petition relating to slavery or the abo- 
lition of slavery — and with the right of petition on this 
subject, the freedom of speech in the House will be in like 
manner abridged. That the freedom of the press in this 
city will share the same fate, you have premonitory symp- 
toms in the pledge already extorted from the National In- 
telligencer, immediately after the publication of Mr. Slade's 
letter, containing the argument which he intended to ad- 
dress to the House on the right of slaves to petition, but 
which was cut off by the previous question. 

If this refusal to receive petitions, and to hear delibera- 
tive argument upon any question relating to slavery, could 
be confined to that subject alone, I might have spared my- 
self the reluctant labor, and you the weary perusal of these 
addresses — but if coming events cast their shadows before 
them, we shall soon be hurried into the midst of a revolu- 
tion more formidable than any collision between the co- 
ordinate departments of the government for patronage, any 
transitory tampering with the currency, any scramble be- 
tween rival usurers and stock-jobbers for deposits of the 
public money, any swindling Indian treaties, or more 
swindling Indian wars, or any deep dissension between the 
cotton-gin of the planter and the spinning-jenny of the fac- 
tory. All these may be compromised — all these may be 
occasionally used as ladders to power, and ascended or 
overleaped, according to the shrewdness or the impetuos- 
ity of the aspirants, to reach the summit of ambition. On 
all these lines of separation and opposition between the 
different portions of the Union, the counteracting im- 
pulses of popular leaders may balance each other, and the 
result is nothing worse than fluctuations of public policy, 
and perhaps shortened presidential terms. But the con- 
flict of interests, and of principles involved in the jarring 
elements of freedom and slavery implanted in the physical, 
moral, intellectual nature of our institutions, must sooner 
or later come to an issue, and must control the destinies 
not merely of this nation, but of this hemisphere, and of 
man upon this planet. The abolition of slavery in the 



J. Q. ADAMsj's LETTERS. 39 

District of Columbia is but a drop of water to the ocean 
— but a mite in the mountain laboring with the freedom 
of man. The convulsive spasm produced in the House of 
Representatives of the United States, by the mere question 
wliether they would in any case receive a petition from 
slaves, was not occasioned by any galvanism in the ques- 
tion itself — it was the flash of light over the closed eyes 
of the slaveholder, exhibiting to him his slave petitioning 
for his freedom. It is said that in the turbulent diets 
of Poland, before her subjugation, every member of the 
body possessed the veto povvcr over every act of their 
legislation. The assemblies were held in open air. The 
nobles attended them, mounted on coursers fleet as the 
winds. The right to pronounce the veto was strictly con- 
stitutional ; but woe to him who pronounced; for from the 
moment that it issued from his lips, his only safety was in 
flight. His life was on the speed of his horse. If he did 
not start as he spoke, his noble associates of the diet rush- 
ed upon him instantly, and cut him to pieces. If he fled, 
they galloppsd in pursuit, and whoever overtook him, by a 
stroke of his partisan, severed his head from his body as 
he flew. This was the remedy for the exercise of a con- 
stitutional right in the- republican monarchy of Poland. 
The tiger turn of the gentlemen from the South, upon the 
member who asked the obnoxious question, was indicative 
of the same spirit habitually prevalent among the nobles of 
the Polish diet. Mr. Ingersoll's resolutions partook of the 
same infusion — no longer vindictive, but still minatory. 

Mr. Taylor's resolution was in far more measured, and 
less questionable terms. It was in these words: — 

" Resolved. That slaves do not possess the right of petition, secured to 
iho citizens of the United States by the Constitution." 

This resolution was probably prepared by, or after con- 
sultation, with the President elect of the United States. It 
was amply suflicient, so long as a majority of the House 
of Representatives shall concur in that opinion, to exclude 
the reception of any petition from slaves ; but it was not 
s itisfactory to the gentlemen from the South. Their pur- 
pose y/as to stigmatize the presentation, or, by one of 



40 J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 

Speaker Polk's distinctions, the offer to present such pe- 
tition. The resolution of Mr. Ingersoll gave color to 
their idea, and furnished them with a precedent for the 
future refusal of any petition relating to the abolition of 
slavery. 

Both the resolutions are mere opinions of a majority of 
the House, reversible- at any day when the majority of the 
House shall entertain a contrary opinion. It is not com- 
petent for the House of Representatives to adjudicate 
what are or are not the rights secured to the citizens of 
the United States by the Constitution; but if Mr. Taylor's 
resolution is true, a citizen of the United States, enslaved 
at Algiers, Tunis, or Tripoli, would possess no right to 
petition Congress for his redemption, or for any measures 
to effect it. 

The question whether slaves possess the right of petition, 
is of no practical importance, except as the denial of the 
right is an abridgment of the right itself. Their masters 
will take care to keep the redressing of all their grievances 
in their own hands, and will redress them in their own 
way. But the resolution that the House cannot receive a 
petition from them, is an abridsrment not only of their 
right of petition, but of the constitutional power of the 
House ; and the precedent of that abridgment of power in 
one case yields a principle that may be applied in num- 
berless others, till the whole right of petition shall, like the 
attainment of office, be numbered among the spoils of 
victory — the exclusive possession of the dominant party of 
the day. 

Both the resolutions were adopted by yeas and nays — 
that of Mr. Insrersoll, by a vote of 160 to 35 ; that of Mr. 
Taylor, by 162 to 18. 

The vote of the House, on both the resolutions, indi- 
cates, with much precision, the temper of the House upon 
the subject of the abolition of slavery. I believe further^ 
that the comparative numbers on both sides fairly repre- 
sented the numbers, as well as the opinions of the con- 
stituent body, the people of the United States. I have no 
reason to think there was one member of the House who 



J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 41 

would have voted for the immediate abolition of slavery in 
the District of Colmiibia. The majority were very averse 
to receiving any petitions for that object ; nor was there 
opportunity afforded me of presenting any more, of the 
multitudes which I received and was requested to present. 
On Monday, the 13th of February, the order of receivino- 
petitions was reversed ; commencing with the territories, 
and proceeding from South to North ; and upon the state 
of Massachusetts being called, the House adjourned at the 
motion of Mr. Cave Johnson, a Van Buren member, from 
Tennessee. On the 20th and 27th of February, days 
when, by the rules of the House, petitions should have been 
received, the rules were suspended to give preference to 
other business. In the mean time, an average of eight or 
ten petitions every day, were coming to me, with requests 
that I would present them. On the last day of the session, 
I had two hundred of them in ray hands, from the states 
of ]\Iassachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, New 
York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, and North Carolina. 
It had been customary to allow members having petitions, 
which they had not had the opportunity to present, to 
leave them, at the close of the session, with the clerk, and 
they were entered upon the journals. This the Speaker 
now declined to allow, without a special order of the 
House. Mr. Lawrence, v/ho had also a number of peti- 
tions to present, moved for such an order ; but objection 
was made to the reception of his resolution, and the pres- 
entation of several hundreds of petitions was suppressed ; 
and, among the rest, several relating to subjects in no wise 
connected with slavery or its abolition. Sons of the 
Plymouth Pilgrims ! I have given you a statement, faithful 
and accurate, of the condition of your right of petition, in 
the House of Representatives of the United States, at the 
close of the twenty-fourth Congress. In the Senate, the 
same right was equally prostrated, though with less re- 
sistance, and by the means of other forms. 

Since then, the inauguration of Mr. Van Buren has 
placed a new chief m;rristrate at the head of this Union. 
To those of you who have petitioned for the abolition of 
4 * 



4'2 J. Q. ADAMs's LETTERS. 

slavery in the District of Columbia, it cannot be indifferent 
to learn that the only specific point of policy upon which 
he has thought proper to pledge the conduct of his admin- 
istration in advance, is the denial of that very measure. 
He declares that, even if a bill for abolishing slavery in the 
District of Columbia should obtain the sanction -of a ma- 
jority in both Houses of Congress, he would oppose to its 
enactment his constitutional negative. If this declaration 
means no more than it im.ports, there is little prospect that 
its sincerity or the firmness of his adhesion to its princi- 
ple will ever be put to the test. There is not the remotest 
prospect, that, within the term of his administration, a ma- 
jority of either, much less of both Houses of Congress, will 
be found prepared to vote for that measure ; and if so great 
a change in the public mind should be effected, as would 
produce majorities of both Houses in favor of abolition, it 
vv'ill not be within the efficacy of his veto to resist the 
course of the torrent. But if, as there is reason to appre 
hend, this premise is intended as a pledge, that the whole 
influence, official and personal, of the President of the 
United States shall be applied to sustain and perpetuate 
the institution of domestic slavery, it is a melancholy prog- 
nostic of a new system of administration, of which the 
dearest interests of New England will be the first victims, 
and of which the ultimate result can be no other than the 
dissolution of the Union. 

Slavery has already had too deep and too baleful an in- 
fluence upon the affairs and upon the history of this Union. 
It can never operate but as a slow poison to the morals of 
any community infected with it. Ours is infected with it 
to the vitals. We are told that the national government 
has no right to interfere with the institution of domestic 
slavery in the states, in any manner. What right, then, 
has domestic slavery to interfere in any manner with the 
national government? What right has slavery to interfere 
in the free states with the dearest institutions of their free- 
dom ? with the right of habeas corpus ? with the right 
of trial by jury ? with the freedom of the press? with 
the freedom of speech? with the sacred privacy of co'* 



J. Q. ADA.MS'S LETTEHS. 43 

respondence by the mail ? Yf hat right has slavery to in- 
terfere with the laws of other nations productive of free- 
dom ? What right to interfere with the lav/s of Bermu- 
da ? of the Bahama Islands? of Great Britain? What 
right has she to cast her living chattels upon a soil which 
has banished her forever, and then come whining to the 
national government that the touch of the soil of liberty 
has quickened her chattels into freemen ; and requiring 
of the national government to claim indemnity for her 
emancipated chattels. Nay, more and vv^orse — what right 
has slavery to chide the national government for not de- 
manding her indemnity in a tone sufficiently peremptory? 
for not threatening Great Britain with war, if she lingers 
longer to pay the price of sinews bought and sold? 

If the national government has no right to interfere with 
the institution of domestic slavery in the states, in any 
manner, Vvdiat right has domestic slavery to issue from her 
consecrated boundaries, and call on the national govern- 
ment for protection, for defence, for vindication of her 
pretended and polluted rights? What right has she to 
show her face upon the ocean, where the laws of the na- 
tion have pronounced her detested traffic piracy ? The 
independence of sovereign states, from all foreign interfer- 
ence with their municipal institutions, is reciprocal, or it 
is nothing. If you have no right to interfere with the 
slavery of South Carolina, the slavery of South Carolina 
has no right to interfere with your freedom. 

If the national government has no right to interfere with 
the institution of domestic slavery in any of the states, 
what right has that same government to hang on your 
neck the millstone of Texian slavery? — reinstituted slave- 
ry, in a land where once that curse of God had been ex- 
tinguished ? — slavery restored by fraud and treachery, 
and the imposture of a painted harlot, usurping the name 
of freedom ? Is the annexation of Texas, with her exe- 
crable load o^ eternal slavery, to the Union — is that one 
of the engagements implied in Pvlr. Van Buren's pledge 
never to sign a bill for the abolition of slavery in the Dis- 
trict of Columbia ? If tlie pledo-e of the inau rural address 



44 J. Q. AI>AxMs's LETTERS. 

means any thing more than soothing sound, it means that 
the maintenance and perpetuation of slavery in this Union, 
shall be the cardinal point, the polar star, of Mr. Van 
Buren's administration. And with that pledge, can you 
doubt that the manacles of Texian slavery will be fastened 
upon your hands, and the fetters of Texian slavery upon 
your feet? — Children of Carver, and Bradford, and Wins* 
low, and Alden ! the pen drops from my hand ! 

JOHN aUINCY ADAMS, 



SPEECH OF JOHN QUINCY ADAMS, 

OF MASSACHUSETTS, 

IN THE U. S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

February 9, 1837, 

Oil the Resolutions to censure him for inquiring of the Speaker, 
whether a paper purporting to he from Slaves, came ivithin the 
order of the House, ivhidi laid on the table all petitions relating 
to Slavery. 

[Reported by the Editor of the Boston Daily Advocate.] 



Mr. Speaker : — I shall endeavor to occupy as little of 
the time of this House as possible, in what I am about to 
say ; and shall forbear to introduce into my remarks a 
great deal I had intended to say, should I be permitted to 
speak in my defence. I wish to bring back the House to 
the only question really before it; and that is, the question 
I propounded to the Speaker, and which he put to the 
House last Monday, whether a paper, which I held in my 
hand, purporting to come from slaves, was within the 
resolution of this House, laying on the table all petitions, 
resolutions and papers relating to the subject of slavery. 
On that inquiry, no question has been taken by the House. 
I am anxious that question should be taken by yeas and 
nays, whether this House, under any circumstances, will 
receive a petition from slaves. 

When I made that inquiry, a member from Georgia (Mr. 
Haynes) said he could not tell in what manner to meet a 
proposition of this kind. It might be giving it more im- 
portance than it deserved, to notice it at all. Well, sir, if 
it was deserving of no attention, why did not the House 



46 SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 

vote directly on the proposition of the Speaker, yea or nay, 
whether that paper came within the resolution of the 
House ? Instead of that, the House has been occupied 
four days, by the attempts of gentlemen to censure me for 
doing what I did not attempt to do. — Now, sir, I did not 
present that paper to the House. I knew it was a question 
that demanded deliberation. I knew it would receive 
deep attention from this House, from this nation, and from 
the civilized world. I was prepared to submit to any 
decision the House might take upon it, but I was desirous 
that the House should take a direct vote upon it, and that 
the vote should remain a record for all time. But I was 
aware that it opened the whole question of the condition 
of slavery in this country, and the whole extent of the 
rights and privileges of members of this House, in the 
exercise of the liberty of speech. That freedom of speech 
is, I trust, to one portion of the House, still dear. Of 
another portion, I cannot say, from what I have seen and 
heard within these four days, that I entertain that hope. I 
say I was av^^are that the answer to ray question opened the 
whole subject of the condition of slaves, and the right of 
speech of members of this House. Well, sir, has this 
question been considered? Of all the gentlemen who, for 
three days, have consumed the time of this House upon 
the succession of resolutions of censure upon me for 
asking that question, one gentleman only, (Mr. French, of 
Kentucky,) v.dio has fdied a judicial station, gave us what 
he thought a sound constitutional argument, to show that 
this House oiiffht not to receive petitions from slaves under 
any circumst; :;;:; s. The argument of that gentleman 
was able ; but if the rejection of the petition depends on 
that argument, those Vv'^ho vote with him must recur to 
other arguments to sustain their course. What was his 
argument? It v/as, that, if you abolish slavery in the 
states of this Union, by taking away a portion of tlie 
representation in slave states, you violate the Constitution. 
Now, I ask for the chain or connection between the prem- 
ises and the conclusion. Is that the gentleman's logic, 
that, if you abolish slavery, you take away a portion of the 



SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 47 

right of representation, secured by the Constitution, and 
therefore the slave has no right to petition? 

\Mx. French rose and explained, not materially varyincr 
the proposition.] 

Mr. Adams. Has the gentleman connected his prem- 
ises and conclusion any better than before? Suppose, for 
a moment, that slavery were abolished; how would it fol- 
low that the slave states would lose any portion of their 
representation? Would not the consequence be directly 
the reverse, and increase, instead of diminishing, their 
representation ? If slavery were abolished in the states, 
those who are now represented as slaves, would form apart 
of the v/hole number of free persons, and Vv^ould be repre- 
sented as such. But suppose, for argument sake, that the 
abolition of slavery should reduce the proportional repre- 
sent2ition of the slave states. What has my question to 
do with the abolition of slavery in the states ? My ques- 
tion was, whether a petition from slaves came v/ithin th.e 
order of the 18th of January, that all memorials, resolu- 
tions, petitions, and papers, relating, in any manner, to 
slavery or the slave trade, should, without being printed 
or referred, be laid on the table, and no further action of 
the House should be had thereon. The order made no 
discrimination of persons, from whom the petitions or 
papers should come. It included all petitions— «// paperj. 
The paper that I held was a petition — it was a paper. It 
came rigidly within the letter of the order — and what was 
there to exclude it from its spirit? It was to be laid on 
the table without reading, without printing, without being 
referred, without further action upon it by the House. 
Why should it not come under that order ? It came from 
slaves? There was nothing in that order excluding peti- 
tions from slaves. There is not a word in the Constitution 
of the United States excluding petitions from slaves. 
Suppose the abolition of slavery should reduce the repre- 
sentation of the slave states; does that prove that, without 
the abolition of slavery, the slave shall not be permitted to 
cry for mercy? to plead for pardon? to utter the shriek of 
perishing nature for relief? The gentleman argued upon 



48 SPEECH OI^ J. Q. ADAMS. 

a question entirely different from tliat put by the Speaker 
to the House, and which I yet hope the House will answer, 
whether, under any circumstances, they will receive a 
petition from slaves ? 

I beg leave to explain my views of the argument, on the 
right of petition. One of my colleagues (Mr. Gushing) 
has justly said, that the right of petition is not a right 
derived from the Constitution, but a preexisting right of 
man, secured by a direct prohibition in the Constitution to 
Congress to pass any law to im.pair or abridge it. Sir, the 
framers of the Constitution would have repudiated the idea 
that they were giving to the people the right of petition. 
No, sir. That right God gave to the whole human race, 
when he made them men^ — the right of prayer, by asking 
a favor of another. My doctrine is, that this right belongs 
to humanity, — that the right of petition is the right of 
prayer, not depending on the condition of the petitioner ; 
and I say, if you attempt to fix any limit to it, you lay the 
foundation for restriction to any extent that the madness 
of party spirit may carry it. This is my belief, and if the 
House decide that the paper I have described comes within 
the resolution, I will present it, and, in so doing, shall 
feel that I am performing a solemn duty. 

What, sir ! place the right of petition on the character 
and condition of the petitioner, or base it upon a mere 
political privilege ! Such a decision would present this 
country to all the civilized world as more despotic than 
the worst of barbarian nations. The sultan of Turkey 
cannot walk the streets of Constantinople and refuse to 
receive a petition from the vilest slave, who stands to meet 
him as he passes by. The right of petition contests no 
power ; it admits the power. It is supplication ; it is 
prayer; it is the cry of distress, asking for relief; and, 
sir, sad will be the day when it is entered on the Journals 
of this House, that we will, under no circumstances, 
receive the petition of slaves. When you begin to limit the 
right, where shall it stop? The gentleman on my left (Mr. 
Patton, of Virginia) objected to another petition, which I 
did present, from women of Fredericksburg, because it 



SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 49 

came from free colored people. That was giving color to an 
idea with a vengeance !* But the gentleman went farther, 
and made the objection that I had presented a petition 
from women of infamous character — prostitutes, I think 
he called them. 

[Mr. Fulton rose to explain. It was not so. When 
the gentleman presented that petition, which I knew came 
from mulattoes in a slave state, I meant to confine my 
objection to petitions of mulattoes or free negroes in the 
Southern States. I meant to rescue the ladies of Fred- 
ericksburg from the stigma of having signed such a pe- 
tition. Sir, no lady in Fredericksburg would sign such a 
petition.] 

Mr. Adams. With respect to the question what female 
is entitled to the character of a lady, and what not, I 
should be sorry to enter into a discussion here. I have 
never made it a condition of my presenting a petition 
here, from females, that they should all be ladies, though, 
sir, I have presented petitions for the abolition of slavery 
in this District, from ladies as eminently entitled to be 
called such, as the highest aristocrats in the land. When 
I have presented these petitions, I have usually said they 
were from women, and that, to my heart, is a dearer appel- 
lation than ladies. 

But, sir, I recur to my first position — ^that when you 
establish the doctrine that a slave shall not petition be- 
cause he is a slave, that he shall not be permitted to raise 
the cry for mercy, you let in a principle subversive of eve- 
ry foundation of liberty, and you cannot tell where it will 
stop. The next step will be that the character, and not 
the claims, of petitioners will be the matter to be discussed 
on this floor ; and whenever, as in the case of the gentle- 
man from Virginia, (Mr. Patton,) any member finds a name 
on a petition which belongs to a person whom he says he 
knows to be of bad character, a motion will be made not to 
receive the petition, or to return it to the member who 
offered it. The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Patton) 

* One of the resolutions proposed to censure Mr. Adams for having at- 
tempted io give color to the idea that slaves had a right to petition ! 

5 



50 SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 

says he knows these women, and that they are infamous. 
IIoiD does the gentleman know it? [A laugh.] 

[Mr. Patton. I did not say that I knew the women, 
personally. I knew from others that the character of one 
of them was notoriously bad.] 

Mr. Adams. I am glad the gentleman now says he 
does not know these women, for if he had not disclaimed 
that knowledge, I might have asked lolto it was that made 
these women infamous,— whether it was those of their own 
color or their masters. I have understood that there are 
those among the colored population of slaveholding states, 
who bear the image of their masters. [Great sensation.] 

Mr. Glascock, of Georgia, here went across the hall to 
the seat of Mr. Adams, and, amidst cries of *' Order," held 
up to him the petition of the women of Fredericksburg, 
and said, " Is not that your hand-writing, endorsed ' From 
ladies of Fredericksburg' ? " 

Mr. Adams. Mr. Speaker, I did not designate them as 
ladies when I presented the petition. That is my hand- 
writing ; but when I endorsed it, and sent it to the table, I 
did not know or suspect that the petitioners were colored 
people. 

Here, then, is another limitation to the right of petition. 
First, it is denied to slaves, then to free persons of color, 
and then to persons of notoriously bad character. Now, 
sir, if you begin by limiting this right as to slaves, you 
next limit it as to all persons of color, and then you go 
into inquiries as to the character of petitioners before you 
will receive petitions. There is but one step more, and 
that is to inquire into the political faith of petitioners. 
Each side will represent their opponents as being infamous; 
and what becomes of the right of petition? Where and 
how will the right of petition exist at all, if you put it on 
these grounds ? 

A gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Robertson,) to whose 
candor and generosity on this occasion T offer my tribute 
of thanks, as it contrasts with the treatment I experience 
from others, — though disapproving, in the strongest terms, 
the pertinacity of zeal which I have so often manifested 



SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 51 

in behalf of this right of petition, — is unwilling to pass a 
vote of formal censure upon me, because he sees how 
manifestly incompatible that would be with any freedom 
of speech in this House. He says — and he is a distin- 
guished lawyer — that there can be no right to petition, 
where there is no power to grant the prayer. This is 
ingenious and plausible; but that gentleman, even whose 
disapprobation is more painful to me than would be the 
formal censure of others, might excuse me, if I cannot 
assent to the correctness of his argument. The want of 
power to grant the prayer of a petition is a very sufficient 
reason for rejecting that prayer, but it cannot impair the 
right of the petitioner to pray. 

The question of power applies to the authority to grant 
the petition, but not to the right of the petitioner to pre- 
sent his petition. The power to grant it is often one of 
the most mooted questions in the world. In relation to 
this very matter of slavery, the power to grant the prayer 
of those who ask for its abolition in the District of Co- 
lumbia, is the question that divides this House. Ask the 
gentlemen from slaveholding states, in this House, wheth- 
er Congress has that power. Not one of them will say 
they have. 

[Mr. Graves, of Kentucky, who was sitting near Mr. 
Adams, and who had declared, in this debate, that he 
held Congress had that power, reminde.d him of the fact.] 

Mr. Adams. Yes, one gentleman from Kentucky has 
affirmed that Congress has the power to abolish slavery in 
this District, but very few from slaveholding states v/ill 
say so ; and I do not know what it may cost that gentle- 
man for having uttered such an opinion on this floor. 
Ask two of the representatives from Maine, ask the 
members from Vermont, from Massachusetts, from Rhode 
Island, from Connecticut, from— ^no, I will not go to New 
Hampshire nor New York, untd I see how they vote on 
the question before the House. Ask the representatives 
of none but freemen on this floor, and their answer will 
be that Congress has the power. 

The ground of the gentleman from Virginia, who de- 
nies tlie right of petition without the power to grant, is 



52 SPEECH or J. Q, ADAMS. 

perfectly consistent with his doctrine that Congress has 
no power to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia ; 
but, sir, that is not the opinion of this House, and this 
House is anti-abolition, by an overwhelming majority. I 
am so myself; but, upon the single question of the power 
of Congress to abolish slavery within the District, there 
is a great majority of this House in favor of the power. 

The gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Robertson) believes 
that Congress has no such power, and here he denies the 
right of petition for the exercise of a power which Con- 
gress does not possess. Well, sir, for the sake of the 
argument, I might grant him his premises, and then deny 
his conclusion. It would reduce the right of petition to 
nothing more than the right of the predominant party, for 
the time being, to petition. It would exclude all petitions 
from those who held with a minority in Congress, as to 
the right to exercise any given power ; and the right of 
petition would be hedged in, until it would be reduced to 
a mere nullity as to its essential characteristic — a supplica- 
tion from one man in distress to another, who, he believes, 
has the power to relieve him. I wish it was in my power 
to illustrate this principle further, without taking up more 
of the time of the House than I intend to do; but I for- 
bear. This, sir, is the ground of my doctrine — that the 
right of petition cannot be limited, by any act of this 
House, so as to deny the right to supplicate to the slave. 

In the course of the argument on the right of petition, 
I should say debate, sir, during three days, the real ques- 
tion before the House has been changed to an almost 
countless series of resolutions, bearing down upon me, all 
intended, directly or indirectly, to censure me for asking 
a question of the Speaker, which he referred to the House, 
and which the House has not yet answered. I will not go 
through a detail of all these resolutions, with which gen- 
tlemen from the South pounced down upon me like so 
many eagles upon a dove. I make no account of the 
cries heard all around, when I asked that question, " Expel 
him, expel him!" They are not in the resolutions. The 
first resolution to censure me came from the gentleman 
from Georgia, (Mr. Haynes.) That was not strong enough, 



SPEECH OP J. Q. ADAMS. 53 

and was followed by one more bitter, from the gentleman 
from South Carolina, (Mr. Waddy Thompson.) Even 
tliat was thought too mild for my offence, and was fol- 
lowed by Timodijication from the gentleman from Alabama, 
(Mr. Lewis,) which the gentleman from South Carolina 
accepted. I will not enumerate the rest, as they were 
showered upon me in quick succession, all reminding me 
of the exclamation of Dame duickly, 

'^ O ! day and nig-ht, but these are bitter words ! " 

But, in the midst of the exultation of the gentlemen, — for 
they seemed sure of two thirds of the House to carry any 
thing they chose to propose, — I was under the necessity of 
rising, as soon as I could get the floor, and asking the 
gentlemen, before they brought me as a culprit to the bar 
to be censured, to amend their resolution, and make it 
conform to the facts, about which they had not thought it 
worth while, in their very great zeal to put me down, to 
inquire at all. Well, instead of admitting their error into 
which they had run, without a word from me to justify it, 
the gentlemen took advantage of my explanation of the 
nature of the paper purporting to come from slaves, and 
pounced upon me with another resolution, charging me 
with the high crime and misdemeanor of their own false 
construction of the contents of the paper, which they as- 
sumed to be a petition from slaves for abolition, and that 
I had permitted the House to believe it was true ! So I 
was to be gravely censured for gentlemen believing what 
they had no right to believe, nor even to infer, and what 
I had never said one word to justify them in believing ! 
But it was soon found that this would not do, and another 
proposition came from the gentleman from Georgia, which 
answered the purpose no better, and which he was obliged 
to withdraw. There came another resolution, from the 
honorable gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Dromgoole,) 
charging a new crime of most alarming import, and that 
was, that I had ^^ given color to an ideaV^ [Laugh.] I 
will not say a word upon that charge in the indictment 
against me. The gentleman from Maine (Mr. Evans) 
has so keenly exposed it to the ridicule it deserves, that 



54 SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 

those who introduced it cannot desire to hear any thing 
more said upon that suhject. 

Sir, there was, for once in this House, a remarkable 
unanimity between gentlemen found in opposition to each 
other on all other questions. A gentleman, whose speeches 
on this floor have not caused him to be regarded as the 
most devoted friend of this administration, (Mr. Waddy 
Thompson, of South Carolina,) proposed his resolution of 
censure. A devoted friend of the administration (Mr. 
Dromgoole, of Virginia) proposed an amendment which 
the gentleman from South Carolina accepted at once, and 
that was to censure me for giving color to an idea ! Sir, it 
was in vain that I rose, and gave the gentlemen the sober 
advice to attend a little more to their facts. The moment I 
attempted to explain, and set aside all their assumed facts, 
wliisk ! there came another resolution of censure, charging 
me with trifling with the House. It was not what I did, 
but what I did not do. 

I did not get up soon enough, it seems, to show these 
gentlemen the best way to censure me, and enable them to 
correct their resolutions, which they had brouglit forward 
Vv'ith sucli zeal and in such rapid succession, but in which, 
unfortunately for them, there was not one word of truth. 

When I say there was not one word of truth in the res- 
olutions of the gentlemen from South Carolina and Ala- 
bama, I do not call in question their veracity. There are no 
men in whose veracity I would sooner trust my whole 
life; but I tell them that, when they undertake to charge 
a member of this House, who never gave them the slight- 
est cause of oifence, with crimes that should draw down 
upon him the censure of this body, without first ascertain- 
ing the facts, they have stepped beyond the bounds of dis- 
cretion and propriety ; and I will give them one word of 
advice, — that, when they draw up resolutions to censure me, 
they should first be careful to pay a little attention to facts. 

[This allusion brought Mr. Lewis and Mr. Thompson 
both on their feet. j\lr. Lewis, of Alabama,, said that he 
came into the House in the midst of the excitement, and, 
on inquiry, was told that the gentleman from Massachu- 



SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 55 

setts, Mr. Adams, lip.d attempted to present a petition from 
slaves. He took it for granted it was a petition for abo- 
lition, and it was full two hours before he understood that 
it was of a different character. Had he known the object 
of the petition, he should not have offered the resolution.] 

Mr. Adams. Sir, I very readily admit the explanation 
of the gentleman. He took for granted what happened 
not to be true. But I do not intend the slightest disre- 
spect to the gentlemen. I only take the occasion to give 
them a little advice, the advice of an old man to ardent 
young men, to govern their future conduct in this House, 
when they undertake to censure their colleagues. But I 
want another explanation from the gentleman from South 
Carolina, (Mr. Waddy Thompson,) and I want to know 
if the language I find here reported in the Intelligencer as 
his, is really the expression of his deliberate opinion. 
[Mr. Thompson rose to explain.] 

Mr. Adams. I shall want an explanation of another 
matter from the gentleman, and he may explain both when 
I have stated it fully. I read from the report of that gen- 
tleman's remarks in the National Intelligencer : — 

" Docs the gentleman, even in the latitude which he gives to the right of 
petition, think that it includes slaves^ If he does not, he has wilfully viola- 
ted the rules of the House, and the feelings of its members." 

[Mr. Thompson was on his legs again to explain. — Mr. 
Adams. I have not done yet. There is more of it to 
come. — He then continued reading — ] 

" Does that gentleman know, that there are laws in all the slave states, 
and here, for the punishment of those who excite insurrection? I can tell 
him that there are such things as Gra7id Juries ; and if, sir, the juries of this 
District have, as I doubt not they have, proper intelligence and spirit, he 
may j'et be made amenable to another tribunal, and we may yet see an in- 
cendiar}' brought to condign punishment."* 

* The above report is known to have been written by Mr. Thompson him- 
self, but the last clause of the quotation is not correctly reported. The pre- 
cise language of Mr. Thompson was — " It is a violation of the criminal law 
of this District. What is the difference between presenting the petitions of 
slaves to be emancipated, and aiding them to escape ? My life on it, if the 
gentleman has the courage to carry it thus far, and will present that petition 
•^my life on it, we shall yet see him within the walls of a penitentiary ! " — 
Reporter. 



S6 SPEECH OF i. Q. ADAMS. 

[Mr. Waddy Thompson was now permitted to explain. 
He stated he had thought there was not a human being 
who believed that slaves had a right to petition, untd he 
heard, with astonishment, that gentleman avow that he 
held that slaves had a right to petition. As to the other 
portion of what the gentleman had read, at the time the 
remark was made, he (Mr. T.) understood that the paper 
the gentleman called the attention of the House to, was 
a petition from slaves for the abolition of slavery. I did 
characterize it as an incendiary act, the presenting of 
such a petition ; and any person, in my judgment as a 
lawyer, is amenable to the laws, who will present a 
petition from slaves for the abolition of slavery. Had I 
known the character of the petition, I certainly should 
not have made those remarks. I take the responsibility, 
personally and direct, of every one of those epithets, so 
far as they apply to a petition from slaves for the abolition 
of slavery. I do not now apply it to tlie gentleman from 
Massachusetts.] 

Mr. Adams. The House may take the explanation 
of the gentleman as they please. There, sir, stands the 
sentiment — there is the printed language, in which the 
gentleman threatened me with indictment by a grand 
jury of the District, as a felon and an incendiary, for 
iDords spoken in this House ! The gentleman has again 
avowed it, and declares that, if the petition had been for 
abolition, and I had presented it, he would not only have 
brought me to the bar to be censured by this House, or 
have voted to expel me, but he would have invoked upon 
my head the vengeance of the grand jury of this 
District ! Yes, sir, he would make a member of this 
House, for words spoken in this House, amenable to the 
grand and petit juries of the District of Columbia ! Sir, 
the only answer I make to such a threat from that gentle- 
man, is to invite him, when he returns home to his con- 
stituents, to study a little the Jirst principles of civil 
liberty ! That gentleman appears here the representative 
of slaveholders ; and I should like to be informed, how 
many there are of such representatives on this floor, who 



SPEECH OP J. Q. ADAMS. 67 

endorse that sentiment. [" I do not," exclaimed Mr. 
Underwood, of Kentucky. " I do not," was heard from 
several other voices.] Is it to be tolerated, that, for any 
thing a member says on this floor, though it were blas- 
phemy or treason, he is to be held accountable and 
punished by a grand and petit jury of the District, and 
not by this House ? If that is the doctrine of the slave- 
holding representatives on this floor, let it, in God's 
name, go forth, and let us see what the people of this 
nation think of such a sentiment, and of those who make 
such an avowal. 

Mr. Wise, of Virginia, rose. — Does any man say he 
will endorse that sentiment for the South'? 

Mr. Adams. I only say, let those of the South who 
will endorse it, avow it. I want the country should know 
who they are. 

Mr. Wise. I will not endorse it. If I believed that 
the members of this House were amenable in any way, as 
such, to the juries of this District, I would not hold a 
seat here for one moment. Sir, this petty tribunal of the 
District, to which, it is suggested, the people of the 
United States, in the persons of their representatives, are 
to be held amenable, is notoriously under the dictation 
of the President, and is selected by an officer of his 
appointment. Have we not seen the Executive dictating 
to the Senate and to this House, and calling upon mem- 
bers to purge themselves of contempt? 

[Mr. Waddy Thompson was brought up again. He 
referred, he said, to the laws of South Carolina, and, by 
those laws, if any member of the Legislature should 
present a petition from slaves, he would be liable to 
indictment by a grand jury.] 

Mr. Adams. That may do for a Southern Legislature, 
to help out the gentleman ; and if it is the law of South 
Carolina, that the members of her Legislature are held 
amenable to petit and grand juries, for words spoken in 
debate, God Almighty receive my thanks that I am not a 
citizen of South Carolina! [Great sensation. Mr. 
Pickens, of South Carolina, rose, apparently to explain 
this subject.] 



58 SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 

Mr. Adams, (waving his hand.) I cannot yield the 
floor to that gentleman. Sir, in Great Britain, which we 
call a monarchy, the legislative body corresponding to 
this House — the Commons — cannot elect their Speaker 
without the approbation of the King. Suppose, sir, a 
member of this House should propose to send a message 
to the President for his approval of our choice of a 
Speaker. What would be the opinion of that act, by the 
slaveholding representatives themselves? Then would 
be the time, if ever, to send the member who should make 
such a proposition, to the grand jury. 

Well, sir, the first act of the Speaker chosen by the 
British Commons, subject to the approval of the King, is 
to demand of the King freedom of speech for the Com- 
mons, and the King never sends them to the grand juries 
of Westminster to settle it. 

I will not take up the tim.e of the House on this point, 
but I cannot express the amazement with which such a 
doctrine, such a threat, will be regarded when it shall go 
forth in this debate to all the non-slaveholding states — 
amazement that, the moment it was uttered, it w^is not 
instantly rebuked by the Speaker from the Chair. Sir, if 
I ever could bring my mind to censure a member of this 
House for any language uttered here, I can conceive of 
nothing more deserving it, than such a real, gross con- 
tempt of the House as this. Yf hat, sir ! the members of 
this House, the representatives of this whole nation, an- 
swerable to a grand jury of this District for words spoken 
in this House! The members from New England, from 
New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and tlie free 
Western States, amenable to grand juries of the District 
of Columbia for their acts as representatives ! liable to be 
tried as felons, and punished as incendiaries, for present- 
ing, or ^'giving color to tJie idea" that they m.ay present, 
petitions not exactly agreeable to certain gentlemen from 
the South ! Sir, if that is the condition upon which we 
hold OUT seats here, and exercise our functions as the 
representatives of our constituents, the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Wise) has anticipated me in what I had 



SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 59 

to say ; and that is, that, if grand juries, constituted as 
they will be here, if they are to be made the avengers of 
whatever may be said or done in this House, how long 
will it be before the gentleman from South Carolina him- 
self (Mr. Waddy Thompson) will have to answer before a 
grand and petit jury of the District, as an incendiary, for 
words spoken here against the Executive 1 And I ask 
him with what firmness or freedom he could resist execu- 
tive power, if, for every word he utters, he is to be held 
amenable to a grand jury selected by the marshal, an offi- 
cer appointed by the President ? Let that gentleman, let 
every member of this House, ask his own heart, w^ith what 
confidence, with what boldness, with what freedom, with 
what firmness, he would give utterance to his opinions on 
this floor, if, for every word, for a mere question asked of 
the Speaker, involving a question belonging to human free- 
dom, to the rights of man, he was liable to be tried as a 
felon or an incendiary, and sent to the penitentiary ! And 
this jury, selected by an officer of the President, are to be 
the supreme judges of the sovereign American people, in 
the persons of their representatives ? Such is the avowed 
doctrine of the gentleman from South Carolina ; such are 
his notions of freedom of speech and of civil liberty ! 

I have dwelt long on this topic, and will abridge what 
I had to say of other matters brought into this debate. I 
might, perhaps, have been willing to have had the yeas 
and nays taken on this resolution to censure me, without 
saying one word ; but it was impossible for me to remain 
silent without calling on the House to mark and repel 
this sentiment avowed by the gentleman from South 
Carolina. I could not pass over such a sentiment uttered 
on this floor, and not, as it ought to have been, at once 
put down by the Speaker. 

Sir, I do not know how far the southern gentlemen 
will endorse that sentiment. Probably I never shall know. 
What I have said, and more than I have time to say, has 
been called for by an imperative sense of duty, as I regard 
it, when such a threat as this has been uttered, though by 
but a siiisle member of this House. 



60 gSPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 

Did the gentleman think he could frighten me from my 
purpose by his threat of a grand jury? If that was his 
object, let me tell him, he mistook his man. I am not to 
be frightened from the discharge of a duty by the indig- 
nation of the gentleman from South Carolina, nor by all 
the grand juries in the universe. The right by which the 
national representative holds his seat here, is of vital im- 
portance, and, that it may be understood, I hope that this 
debate will go forth and be read by the whole people, and 
that, among other remarkable things, they will mark this 
threat of the gentleman from South Carolina. 

Sir, we have heard much of the great superiority of 
Anglo-Saxon blood. Is there a man living, with a drop 
of that blood in his veins, who will subscribe to this 
doctrine of the member from South Carolina? Are these 
the principles of freedom by which to regulate the delibe- 
rations of a legislative assembly ? I ask any member of 
this House what he thinks would be the issue, if a mem- 
ber of the British House of Commons should rise in his 
place, and tell another member that, for words spoken 
there, he should be held amenable to a grand jury of 
Westminster. Sir, it would be considered too ridiculous 
for indignation : it would be received with one universal 
shout of laughter, and from thenceforth subject the author 
of such a measure to be held up 

" Sacred to ridicule his whole life \ong, 
And the sad burden of some merry song."* 

[Laughter.] Arraigned, as I have been, Mr. Speaker, 
on such a variety of charges, changing their ground in 
such rapid succession, it has been impossible to make my 
defence with any system or order. All that I say is 
unavoidably desultory. Whenever my accusers presented 
the color of an idea, before I could fix it, it was gone, and 
other ideas of other colors presented in its stead. The 
gentlemen have performed their parts here like those 
persons known in theatrical companies by the name of 

* ]Mr. Thompson is a violent opposition member, and'Vehement in his de- 
nunciations of the President. — Reporter, 



SPEECH OP J. Q. ADAMS. 61 

actors of all work, who assume many characters in the 
same play, and change their dresses so often, that you 
never know it is the same actor that comes in, in so many 
different parts, all so unlike. So has it been in the rapid 
changes of the gentlemen, who, in a variety of characters, 
have arraigned me as a criminal to be brought to the bar, 
on the charge of gross contempt, for ^^ giving color to an 
idea ! " How can I reply to such a charge, or how de- 
fend myself against the allegation of such a crime '? Such 
are the attempts made to bring down upon my head the 
indignation and censure of this House ; a calamity, sir, 
which I should regard as the heaviest misfortune of a long 
life, checkered as it has been by many and severe vicissi- 
tudes. Yes, sir, 1 avow, that, if a vote of censure should 
pass upon my name, for any act of mine in this Plouse, it 
would be the heaviest of all calamities that have ever be- 
fallen me. 

Sir, am I guilty, have I ever been guilty, of contempt to 
this House? Have I not guarded the honor of this House 
as a cherished sentiment of my heart 1 Have I not respect- 
ed this House as the representatives of the whole people of 
the whole Union 1 Have I ever been regardless of the great 
representative principle of the people, here exhibited? 
Have I ever been wanting, as a member of this body, in a 
proi)er esprit da corps ? Have I not defended the honor 
of this House on more than one occasion 1 Was I not the 
first, on a former occasion, to vindicate members of this 
House from the charge of being susceptible to bribery and 
corruption — a charge coming from one to whom the major- 
ity were most devoted ? Have I not defended this House 
from charges from another quarter, to which I wish no 
further to allude?* And am I now to be censured for 
doing what I have not done, or for not doing what I did 
not do, under pretence of a contempt of this House, in an 
act which was done from motives of the highest possible 
respect to this House? for never, in any act of my life, did 

" Referring-, it is presumed, lo the able defence Mr. A. made, tlie last ses- 
sion, against the attacks of ]Mr. Webster on the majority of the House for 
voting; the three millions appropriation, on the French question. — Reporter. 





62 SPEECH OF J. a. ADAMS. 

I more consult the respect due to this House^ than in pro- 
posing the question I put to the Speaker, touching that 
paper from slaves. 

Sir, if he be an enemy who shall succeed in bringing 
down upon me, directly or indirectly, the censure of this 
House — I say, if he be an enemy who votes for this, let 
him know he has his revenge, his triumph ; for a heavier 
calamity could never fall upon me on earth ! 

And this brings me to the resolutions before the House.* 
I object to the first resolution (otfered by Mr, Patton, of 
Virginia) because it does not meet and answer my question. 
Let the question be put by yeas and nays, and I am will- 
ing to record my yea that it is the duty of the House to 
receive petitions from slaves ; and I shall regard it as of 
high import to free institutions, if, on full deliberation, the 
House refuse to say that they will receive petitions from 
slaves. The resolution does not say whether they will or 
not. That question, and the only question really before 
the House, is not met. We do not know whether it is 
proper or not to present such petitions. But suppose it is 
not proper. Can there be any offence, before the House 
have settled or considered that question, for a member 
respectfully to ask whether it be proper 1 Now, sir, this 
question is not met, and that is my objection to the first 
resolution. 

The second resolution touches neither my question nor 
me, but pounces on an ideal man. It says, " Every mem- 

* The resolutions were as follows : — 

" Resolved, That the right of petition does not belong to slaves of this 
Union ; that no petition from ihem can be presented to this House, with- 
out derogating from the rights of the slaveholding states, and endangering 
the integrity of the Union. 

" Resolved, Tlial every meml:)cr, who shall hereafter present any such 
petitions to this House, ought to be considered as regardless of the feelings 
of this House, the rights of the South, and an enemy to the Union. 

" Resolved, That, the Hon. John Quincy Adams having solemnly disclaimed 
a design of doing any thing disrespectful to the House, in the inquiry he 
made of the Speaker, as to the right of petition purporting to be from slaves, 
and having avowed his intention not to offer to present the petition, if the 
House was of opinion that it ought not to be presented, — therefore all further 
proceedings as to his conduct now cease." 



SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 63 

ber who shall hereafter present such petition ought to be 
considered an enemy to the Union," &c. What is that, sir, 
but the same threat, indirectly made, which the member 
from South Carolina (Mr. Waddy Thompson) directly 
made, of sendinor the man who should present such a pe- 
tition, to the grand jury of the District of Columbia? 
This resolution declares that the member who shall 
hereafter make an attempt to present any such petition, 
shall be held infamous. Is this another maxim of the 
slaveholding representatives, touching the freedom of speech 
in this House? Sir, if that resolution passes, I will sub- 
mit to it so far as not to present any petitions of slaves, but 
I shall consider it as a resolution most disgraceful and 
dishonorable to this House. What, sir ! is any member of 
this House to be pronounced infamous for offering to aid 
human misery so far as to present its cry for mercy and 
relief to this House ? 

But, sir, not only would such a resolution dishonor this 
body in the eyes of the whole civilized world, it would also 
limit the rights and the liberties of members of this House, 
so as, in fact, to surrender them all. If, sir, you can get a 
vote' to pronounce a member infamous who shall hereafter 
present a petition from slaves, you have but one step 
further to take, and that will be easy in the rage of the 
spirit of party ; you will declare that every man shall be held 
infamous if he proposes any thing displeasing to the 
majority. 

As to the third resolution, I ask of the justice of the 
House not to go for it. It indirectly does what the 
other resolutions of censure did directly. It says that 
no further proceedings shall be had against me, because 
I have disclaimed disrespect, and disavowed an inten- 
tion which no one had the shadow of a right to im- 
pute to me. What is this but saying that, if I had not 
disclaimed and disavowed, I should have been censured 
and punished by an ex post facto law? but that, having 
done so, having in fact pleaded guilty, therefore, out of 
pure kindness, they will forgive me ! Forgive me, sir, for 
what ? For violating the rules of this House, for contempt 



64 SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 

of this House ? No, sir. Had I done so, the Speaker 
should have called me to order, and rebuked me on the 
instant. And suppose, sir, for a moment, it was a viola- 
tion of any rule for me to put the question I did to the 
Speaker, concerning that paper, and this is the offence for 
which I am to be forgiven, — how stands the case of the 
Speaker himself, who put that very question to the House ? 
I don't see but that, if I am to be indicted by a grand jury, 
the Speaker must be indicted with me, for aiding and 
abetting. I did but ask the question of the Speaker ; he 
asked it of the House ; and if there was contempt or crime 
in either case, which was the greater ? 

Sir, I am content that this whole debate should go forth 
as it has been begun in the National Intelligencer, I am 
willing that my constituents, the people of this nation, the 
world, and all after times, should judge of me and my 
action on this great moral question. And here I say, that 
I have not done one single thing I would not do again, 
under like circumstances ; not one thing have I done that 
I have not done under the highest and most solemn sense 
of duty. 

But it is said that I have trifled with the House. That 
I deny. I have disclaimed, I again disclaim, any such in- 
tention. No, sir, I had a higher purpose than trifling with 
this House ; and, having disclaimed such intention, no man 
has a right to charge me with it. Sir, I never acted under 
a more solemn sense of duty; I never was more serious 
in any moment of my life. I take it, therefore, that the 
last resolution, excusing and forgiving me, will not pass. 
It is founded on a supposition of disclaimer and retraction 
on my part. Sir, I renounce all favor from this House on 
the ground of disclaimer or retraction. I have disclaimed 
nothing I have done or said. I have retracted nothing : I 
have done my duty ; and I should do it again, under the 
same circumstances, if it were to be done to-morrow ! 

Members of this House have accused me of consuming 
the time of the House, by presenting abolition petitions 
Is it I, or they, who have done this ? If, sir, gentlemen 
who are opposed to these petitions had permitted them to 



SPEECH OF J. Q. ADAMS. 65 

pass to the table under the rule, no time would have been 
consumed. If the Speaker had promptly answered my 
question, no time would have been consumed in this debate, 
I should never have occupied half an hour on a Monday, 
in presenting these petitions, which I have felt it due to the 
petitioners generally, to present singly, had not gentlemen 
risen to thwart me in the discharge of my duty. Sir, I 
protest against the consummation of the time, taken up by 
debates growing out of objections made by other members, 
being charged to me. I appeal to the House, I appeal to 
the nation, that it is not L but those who object to my 
doings in the discharge of my duty, who are answerable 
for this consumption of time. 

And now, sir, I have done. I have only to add that I 
had hoped that the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Patton,) 
seeing that the House could not be brought to a direct 
censure of me, would have had the magnanimity to with- 
draw his resolution to effect that object indirectly. He 
insists upon having the question taken, and the House must 
decide, 

[The effect of this speech on the House has been rarely 
if ever exceeded by the influence of any speech on any 
assembly. It was delivered after the opponents of Mr. A. 
had inflamed themselves, to the highest exacerbation, by 
most vehement harangues for four days. The speaker had 
to address a majority strongly prejudiced against him, and 
eager to seize any tolerable ground of censure for his 
previous course in presenting abolition petitions. And 
yet the result of this speech, under all these disadvantages, 
was, that but 22 members could be found to vote even 
indirectly and remotely to censure. All the resolutions 
were rejected.] 

6* 



LINES. 



The editor of the Western Messenger, published in Louisville, Kentucky, 
December, 1836, copies the following- poem, and says,/^ It is so full of fire aad 
spirit, so original, so picturesque, that it must give pleasure to every reader. 
The five verses beginning " Shall our New England," are equal to almost 
any thing, in Campbell. Though no friends of abolitionism, we like good 
poetry on any and every subject.." 



LINES 

Written on the passage of Mr. PincMeifs Resolutions, in the 
House of Representatives, and of Mr. Calhoun^s ^^ Bill of 
Abominations,^^ in the Senate of the United States. 

By J. G. Whittier. 

Now, by our fathers' aslios! where's the spirit 

Of the true-hearted and the unshackled gone? 
Sons of old freemen^ do we but inherit 

Their names- alone-?' 

Ig thq old Pilgrim spirit quenched within us ? 

Stoops the pix)ud manhood of our souls so low,. 
That Mammon^s lure or Party's wile can win us. 
To silence now? 

No— when oiir land to ruin^s brink is verging, 

In God's name, let us speak while tlie j« is time I 
JSqw, when the padlocks for our lips are forging, 
Silence is crime! 



LINES. 



67 



What ! shall we henceforth humbly ask as favors 

Rights all our oAvn ? In madness shall we barter, 
For treacherous peace, the freedom Nature gave us, 
God and our charter ? 

Here shall the statesman seek the free to fetter ? 
Here Lynch law light its horrid fires on high ? 
And, in the church, their proud and skilled abettor 
Make truth a lie ? — 

Torture the pages of the hallowed Bible, 

To sanction crime, and robbery, and blood? 
And, in Oppression's hateful service, libel 

Both man and God ? 

Shall our New England stand erect no longer. 

But stoop in chains upon her downward way. 
Thicker to gather on her limbs and stronger 
Day after day ? 

O, no ; methinks from all her wild, green mountains — 

From valleys v.here her slumbering fathers lie — 
From her blue rivers and her v/elling fountains, 

And clear, cold sky ; — 

From her rough coast, and isles, which hungry Ocean 

GnaAvs with his surges — from the fisher's skiff. 
With white sail swaying to tlie billows' motion 

Round rock and cliff; — 

From the free fire-side of her unbought farmer — 
From her free laborer at his loom and wheel — 
From the brown smith-shop, where, beneath the hammer, 
Rings the red steel ; — 



LINES. 

From each and all, if God hath not forsaken 

Our land, and left us to an evil choice. 
Loud as the summer thunderbolt shall waken 
A people's voice! 

Startling and stern ! the northern winds shall bear it 

Over Potomac's to St Mary's wave ; 
And buried Freedom shall awake to hear it 

Within her grave. 

O, let that voice go forth ! The bondman, sighing 

By Santee's wave, in Mississippi's cane, 
Shall feel the hope, within his bosom dying, 
Revive again. 

Let it go forth 1 The miihons who are gazing 

Sadly upon us from afar, shall smile, 
And, unto God devout thanksgiving raising, 

Bless us the while. 

O, for your ancient freedom, pure and holy, 
For the deliverance of a groaning earth. 
For the wronged captive, bleeding, crushed, and lowly. 
Let it go forth ! 

Sons of the best of fathers! will ye falter 

With all they left ye periled and at stake ? 
Ho ! once again on Freedom's holy altar 

The fire awake ! 

Prayer-strengthened for the trial, come together, 

Put on the harness for the moral fight. 
And, with the blessing of your heavenly Father, 

MAINTAIN THE RIGHT ! 



STANZAS FOE THE TIMES. 



STANZAS FOR THE TIMES.* 
By J. G. Whittier. 

[First published in the Boston Courier.] 

Is this the land our fathers loved ? 

The freedom which they toiled to win? 
Is this the soil whereon they moved ? 

Are these the graves they slumber in ? 
Are we the sons by whom axe borne 
Tb;'> mantles which the dead have worn ? 

An- ;^shall we crouch above these graves, 

With craven soul and fettered lip ? 
Yoke in with marked and branded slaves, 

And tremble at the driver's whip ? — 
Bend to the earth our pliant knees, 
And speak — but as our masters please ? 

Shall outraged Nature cease to feel ? 

Shall Mercy's tears no longer flow ? 
Shall ruffian threats of cord and steel — 

The dungeon's gloom — th' assassin's blow 
Turn back the spirit roused to save 
Our Truth — our Country — and the Slave ? 

* The " Times " alluded to were those evil times of the pro-slavery meeting 
sn Faneuil Hall (August 21, 1835,) for the suppression of freedom of speech, 
iesi It should endanger the foundations of comraexcial society. 



70 STANZAS FOR THE TIMES. 

Of human skulls that shrine was made, 
Wliereon the priests of Mexico 

Before their loathsome idol prayed — 
Is Freedom's altar fashioned so ? 

And must we yield to Freedom's God, 

As offering meet, the negro's blood ? 

Shall tongues be mute, when deeds are wrought 
Which well might shame extremest hell ? 

Shall freemen lock th' indignant thougnt ? 
Shall Mercy's bosom cease to swell ? 

Shall Honor bleed ? Shall Truth succumb ? 

Shall pen, and press, and soul, be dumb ? 

No — by each spot of haunted groimd \ 

Where Freedom weeps her children's fall — 
By Plymouth's rock and Bunker's mounu— 

.By Griswold's stained and shattered wall — - 
By Warren's ghost — by Langdon's shad-e— 
By all the memories of our dead !— - 

By their enlarging souls, which burst 
The bands and fetters round them set — 

By the free Pilgrim spirit nursed 
Within our inmost bosoms, yet, — 

By all above — around — below — 

Be ours th' indignant answer — NO L 

No — guided by our country's laws, 

For truth and right, and suffering man^ 



STANZAS FOR THE TIMES. 71 

Be ours to strive in Freedom's cause, 

As Christians may-^-3iS freemen can / 
Still pouring on unAvilling ears 
^hat triith oppression only fears. 

What — shall avc guard our neighbor still, 
While woman shrieks beneath his rod, 
And while he tramples down at will 

The image of a common God? 
Shall watch and ward be round him set 
Of northern nerve and bayonet ? 

And shall we know and share with him 

The danger and the open shame ? 
And see our Freedom's light grow dim, 

Which should have filled the world with flame ? 
And, writhing, feel, where'er we turn, 
A world's reproach around us burn ? 

Is't not enough that this is borne ? 

And asks our haughty neighbor more ? 
Must fetters which his slaves have worn 

Clank round the Yankee farmer's door r* 
Must he be told, beside his plough. 
What he must speak, and when^ and how ? 

Must he be told his Freedom stands 
On Slavery's dark foundations strong — 

On breaking hearts and fettered hands, 
On robbery, and crime, d/id wrong ? — 



72 STANZAS FOR THE TIMES, 

That all his fathers taught is vain ? 
That Freedom's emblem is the chain ? — - 

Its life, its soul, from Slavery drawn ? 

False — foul — profane ! go — teach as well 
Of holy Truth from Falsehood born ! 

Of heaven refreshed by airs from hell I 
Of Virtue nursed by open Vice I 
Of demons planting paradise 1 

Rail on, then, "brethren of the South" — ■ 
Ye shall not hear the truth the less — 

No seal is on the Yankee's mouth, 
No fetter on the Yankee's press ! 

From our Green Mountains to the sea, 

One voice shall thunder — We are free ! 



[trWIL.!. BE PUBLISHED, JUNE 1, 

And for sale at 25 Cornhill, Boston, 
" POEMS, written during the Progress of the Abolition Question 
in the United States, between the Years 1830 and 1837 ; by 
John G. Whittiek." — Embellished with a fine English copper- 
plate engraving, the design suggested by reading Cowpe»'s 
poem entitled the " Morning Dream." 






1* 



r 










^°-'*. 








;^ 





C, vP 










.V 



aV^. 




.5^n 





^' 







<» o. 

y 









f,&^ N.MANCHESTER 
'" INDIANA 







,^ .. 




